Oraki & Anor v Bramston & Anor

The appeal fails because the respondents did not breach any duty as trustees; the alleged acts and omissions did not cause loss or prolong the bankruptcies. The funds claimed to be available were not accessible due to unresolved beneficial ownership, and the respondents acted neutrally and accommodated the appellants’ requests. No personal claim against the trustees is sustainable on the facts.

Parties: Appellant: Sheida Oraki; Appellant: Ardeshir Oraki; Respondent: Timothy Bramston; Respondent: Ian Defty
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 24 May 2017
Procedural Posture: Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome: appeal dismissed
Legal Topics: Trustee Duties, Annulment of Bankruptcy, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Release of Trustee, Damages for Mental Distress

Insolvency Bankruptcy Professional Negligence Trustee Duties Annulment of Bankruptcy Breach of Fiduciary Duty Release of Trustee Damages for Mental Distress

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 11

Parties

Sheida Oraki

Appellant

Ardeshir Oraki

Appellant

Timothy Bramston

Respondent

Ian Defty

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

1 Did the respondents unnecessarily prolong the bankruptcies by failing to use available cash resources?
2 Did the respondents unnecessarily prolong the bankruptcies by obstructing the appellants’ applications to annul their bankruptcies?
3 Are trustees in bankruptcy liable to bankrupts personally for breach of duty outside section 304 of the Insolvency Act 1986?

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed