Marlwood Commercial Inc & Ors v Kozeny & Ors [2008] EWHC 1538 (Comm) (16 June 2008)

Marlwood Commercial Inc & Ors v Kozeny & Ors [2008] EWHC 1538 (Comm) (16 June 2008)

The court determined that the attribution issue—whether Mr. Lewis' knowledge of corruption should be attributed to the Claimants—should be tried as a preliminary issue in January 2009, as its resolution may be determinative of claims in deceit, conspiracy, and breach of fiduciary duty. No variation to the existing freezing order or its fortification was warranted.

Citation
[2008] EWHC 1538 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Marlwood Commercial Inc. & Ors; Defendant: Viktor Kozeny & Ors.
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 June 2008
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Proceedings / Preliminary Issues Determination Prior to Full Trial
Outcome
Preliminary issues to be determined at January 2009 hearing; no variation to freezing order or fortification.
Legal Topics
Attribution of Knowledge, Corporate Liability, Freezing Orders, Illegality, Fiduciary Duty, Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Conspiracy
Commercial Law Company Law Fraud Attribution of Knowledge Corporate Liability Freezing Orders Illegality Fiduciary Duty +2 more

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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 13
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Marlwood Commercial Inc. & Ors

Claimant

Viktor Kozeny & Ors.

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Proceedings / Preliminary Issues Determination Prior to Full Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr. Lewis' knowledge of corruption is to be attributed to the Claimants
  2. 2 Whether other individuals' knowledge should be attributed to the Claimants
  3. 3 Whether Claimants affirmed/adopted or are too late to rescind agreements

Ratio Decidendi

The court determined that the attribution issue—whether Mr. Lewis' knowledge of corruption should be attributed to the Claimants—should be tried as a preliminary issue in January 2009, as its resolution may be determinative of claims in deceit, conspiracy, and breach of fiduciary duty. No variation to the existing freezing order or its fortification was warranted.

Court Disposition

Preliminary issues to be determined at January 2009 hearing; no variation to freezing order or fortification.

Orders

  • January hearing to determine attribution of knowledge and related issues as specified.
  • No further fortification of undertaking in damages.