Prest v Prest & Ors

Prest v Prest & Ors

Permission to appeal is granted on the issues of piercing the corporate veil, Nigerian customary law, and simultaneous lump sum and property transfer orders, but refused on property valuation and budget assessment due to trial judge's discretion and lack of timely challenge.

Parties
Applicant: Yasmin Prest; Respondent: Michael Prest; Interveners: Petrodel Upstream Ltd and other companies
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 February 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Permission to Appeal Granted
Outcome
Permission to appeal granted on specified grounds, refused on others.
Legal Topics
Ancillary Relief, Piercing the Corporate Veil, Customary Law, Property Transfer, Costs
Family Law Company Law Ancillary Relief Piercing the Corporate Veil Customary Law Property Transfer Costs

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yasmin Prest

Applicant

Michael Prest

Respondent

Petrodel Upstream Ltd and other companies

Interveners

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Permission to Appeal Granted

Legal Issues

  1. 1 When and in what circumstances can the court pierce the corporate veil in ancillary relief proceedings?
  2. 2 Does Nigerian customary law regulate the management and distribution of shares in the main trading company?
  3. 3 Is it permissible for the court to make a lump sum order and a transfer of property order simultaneously if the latter is solely to implement the former?

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to appeal is granted on the issues of piercing the corporate veil, Nigerian customary law, and simultaneous lump sum and property transfer orders, but refused on property valuation and budget assessment due to trial judge's discretion and lack of timely challenge.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal granted on specified grounds, refused on others.

Orders

  • Husband must discharge historic costs within 14 days.
  • Husband must pay £540,000 on account of trial and earlier costs within 14 days.