Instituto de Salud para el Bienestar v Viva Enterprises Limited & Anor

Instituto de Salud para el Bienestar v Viva Enterprises Limited & Anor

IMSS has a real prospect of showing it is the valid transferee of INSABI’s interests under Mexican law and the VSA; the anti-assignment clause does not clearly preclude the transfer as it may be a transfer by operation of law, not assignment. Substitution under CPR 19.2(4) is appropriate, and the action is not susceptible to summary determination or strike out.

Parties
Original Claimant: INSTITUTO DE SALUD PARA EL BIENESTAR; Defendant: VIVA ENTERPRISES LIMITED; Defendant: ROBERT GEORGE DANGOOR; Substituted Claimant: SERVICIOS DE SALUD DEL INSTITUTO MEXICANO DEL SEGURO SOCIAL PARA EL BIENESTAR (IMSS)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 November 2024
Procedural Posture
Commercial/contractual Dispute / Interlocutory Application—strike Out and Substitution
Outcome
Defendants’ strike out application dismissed; IMSS substituted as sole claimant in place of INSABI.
Legal Topics
Assignment and Transfer of Contractual Rights, Substitution of Parties, Strike Out Applications, Interpretation of Anti Assignment Clauses
Contract Law Civil Procedure Conflict of Laws Assignment and Transfer of Contractual Rights Substitution of Parties Strike Out Applications Interpretation of Anti Assignment Clauses

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 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

INSTITUTO DE SALUD PARA EL BIENESTAR

Original Claimant

VIVA ENTERPRISES LIMITED

Defendant

ROBERT GEORGE DANGOOR

Defendant

SERVICIOS DE SALUD DEL INSTITUTO MEXICANO DEL SEGURO SOCIAL PARA EL BIENESTAR (IMSS)

Substituted Claimant

Procedural Posture

Commercial/contractual Dispute / Interlocutory Application—strike Out and Substitution

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claims of INSABI could be validly transferred to IMSS under Mexican law and the VSA anti-assignment clause
  2. 2 Whether IMSS should be substituted as claimant in place of INSABI under CPR 19.2(4)
  3. 3 Whether the action should be struck out due to alleged lack of a valid claimant

Ratio Decidendi

IMSS has a real prospect of showing it is the valid transferee of INSABI’s interests under Mexican law and the VSA; the anti-assignment clause does not clearly preclude the transfer as it may be a transfer by operation of law, not assignment. Substitution under CPR 19.2(4) is appropriate, and the action is not susceptible to summary determination or strike out.

Court Disposition

Defendants’ strike out application dismissed; IMSS substituted as sole claimant in place of INSABI.

Orders

  • Strike Out Application dismissed.
  • IMSS substituted as sole claimant under CPR 19.2(4).