Singla v Hedman & Ors [2010] EWHC 902 (Ch) (28 April 2010)

Singla v Hedman & Ors [2010] EWHC 902 (Ch) (28 April 2010)

Mr Hedman is liable for wrongful trading as he committed NMD to the PSA when he knew or ought to have known there was no reasonable prospect of avoiding insolvent liquidation. The OPL was a partial assignment of copyright, not merely a license, and NMD retains proprietary rights. Stonewood had authority to grant the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2010] EWHC 902 (Ch)
Parties
Applicant: Surjit Singla; First Respondent: Thomas Hedman; Second Respondent: Gone to Hell Limited; Third Respondent: Stonewood Communications BV
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 April 2010
Procedural Posture
Chancery Division Trial (high Court) / Judgment After Trial on Liability
Outcome
Claims for wrongful trading and copyright infringement succeed; forged documents declared void; NMD entitled to remedies for infringement or breach of warranty.
Legal Topics
Wrongful Trading, Copyright Infringement, Director's Duties, Fraudulent Documents, Partial Assignment of Copyright, Section 214 Insolvency Act 1986, Section 423 Insolvency Act 1986, Section 238 Insolvency Act 1986
Insolvency Company Law Intellectual Property Wrongful Trading Copyright Infringement Director's Duties Fraudulent Documents Partial Assignment of Copyright +3 more

Source-derived case record

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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Surjit Singla

Applicant

Thomas Hedman

First Respondent

Gone to Hell Limited

Second Respondent

Stonewood Communications BV

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Chancery Division Trial (high Court) / Judgment After Trial on Liability

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr Hedman is liable for wrongful trading under section 214 Insolvency Act 1986
  2. 2 Whether forged and backdated documents were created to defeat creditors and mislead third parties
  3. 3 Whether the One Picture License (OPL) was a partial assignment of copyright or a mere license

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Hedman is liable for wrongful trading as he committed NMD to the PSA when he knew or ought to have known there was no reasonable prospect of avoiding insolvent liquidation. The OPL was a partial assignment of copyright, not merely a license, and NMD retains proprietary rights. Stonewood had authority to grant the OPL, or is estopped from denying it. The forged documents were created to mislead and defeat creditors and are void. GTH's subsequent film infringed NMD's rights. If Stonewood lacked authority, it is liable for breach of warranty under the OPL.

Court Disposition

Claims for wrongful trading and copyright infringement succeed; forged documents declared void; NMD entitled to remedies for infringement or breach of warranty.

Orders

  • Declaration that Mr Hedman is liable for wrongful trading under section 214 Insolvency Act 1986.
  • Declaration that forged and backdated documents are void and of no effect.