Barclay Pharmaceuticals Ltd & Ors v Waypharm LP & Ors

Barclay Pharmaceuticals Ltd & Ors v Waypharm LP & Ors

The Second Defendant's claims against the Claimants and Receiver are totally without merit, disclose no reasonable grounds, lack evidential support, are barred by the reflective loss principle, and do not demonstrate any breach of duty or recoverable loss; leave to sue the Receiver is refused and all claims are struck out.

Parties
Claimant: Barclay Pharmaceuticals Limited; Claimant: AAH Pharmaceuticals Limited; Claimant: AAH Limited; Defendant: Waypharm LP; Defendant: Antoine Mekni; Defendant: David Condliffe; Defendant: Best Financial Services Corporation; Defendant: Kenneth Marketing; Defendant: Waypharm SAS; Court Appointed Receiver: Geoffrey Carton-Kelly (Receiver)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 March 2013
Procedural Posture
Commercial / Post Judgment Applications; Strike Out Applications
Outcome
Second Defendant's claims against Claimants and Receiver dismissed; applications to strike out allowed.
Legal Topics
Receivership, Liquidation, Reflective Loss, Strike Out, Court Appointed Receiver, Cross Undertaking in Damages
Commercial Law Insolvency Company Law Receivership Liquidation Reflective Loss Strike Out Court Appointed Receiver +1 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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Barclay Pharmaceuticals Limited

Claimant

AAH Pharmaceuticals Limited

Claimant

AAH Limited

Claimant

Waypharm LP

Defendant

Antoine Mekni

Defendant

David Condliffe

Defendant

Best Financial Services Corporation

Defendant

Kenneth Marketing

Defendant

Waypharm SAS

Defendant

Geoffrey Carton-Kelly (Receiver)

Court Appointed Receiver

Procedural Posture

Commercial / Post Judgment Applications; Strike Out Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Second Defendant's claims against the Claimants and Receiver disclose reasonable grounds
  2. 2 Whether leave of court is required to sue a court-appointed receiver
  3. 3 Whether the Second Defendant has standing to claim for losses allegedly suffered by companies

Ratio Decidendi

The Second Defendant's claims against the Claimants and Receiver are totally without merit, disclose no reasonable grounds, lack evidential support, are barred by the reflective loss principle, and do not demonstrate any breach of duty or recoverable loss; leave to sue the Receiver is refused and all claims are struck out.

Court Disposition

Second Defendant's claims against Claimants and Receiver dismissed; applications to strike out allowed.

Orders

  • Second Defendant's claims against Claimants and Receiver struck out
  • Second Defendant to pay costs of and incidental to the applications on the standard basis