Voisin and Abacus v Matheson Securities [2000] JCA 144 (24 July 2000)

Voisin and Abacus v Matheson Securities [2000] JCA 144 (24 July 2000)

The Respondent breached its contractual and tortious duty by failing to systematically monitor the investment and relying on unsystematic market communication, resulting in failure to inform the Appellants of material risk and loss.

Citation
[2000] JCA 144
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Michael Matthew Godfray Voisin; Plaintiff/appellant: Abacus (C. I.) Limited (as the Trustees of the Mrs. W. M. I. Prior Settlement); Defendant/respondent: Matheson Securities (Channel Islands) Limited
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
24 July 2000
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal Against Royal Court Judgment Dismissing Claim
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Royal Court decision reversed; breach of contract and negligence found against Respondent.
Legal Topics
Breach of Contract, Negligence, Stockbroker Duties, Investment Monitoring, Duty of Care
Contract Law Tort Law Financial Services Law Breach of Contract Negligence Stockbroker Duties Investment Monitoring Duty of Care

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

Parties

Michael Matthew Godfray Voisin

Plaintiff/appellant

Abacus (C. I.) Limited (as the Trustees of the Mrs. W. M. I. Prior Settlement)

Plaintiff/appellant

Matheson Securities (Channel Islands) Limited

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal Against Royal Court Judgment Dismissing Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Did the Respondent breach its contractual and tortious duty to monitor the investment and inform the Appellants of material risks?
  2. 2 Was the monitoring system employed by the Respondent adequate and reasonable in the circumstances?

Ratio Decidendi

The Respondent breached its contractual and tortious duty by failing to systematically monitor the investment and relying on unsystematic market communication, resulting in failure to inform the Appellants of material risk and loss.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Royal Court decision reversed; breach of contract and negligence found against Respondent.

Orders

  • Finding of breach of contract and negligence against Respondent
  • Damages to be determined unless agreed by Counsel