Hore and Anor v Valmorbida and Anor - [2022] JRC 202 (30 September 2022)

Hore and Anor v Valmorbida and Anor - [2022] JRC 202 (30 September 2022)

The court found that Mr Valmorbida committed fraud and deceit by making false representations, concealing material facts, and misusing company assets, which induced the plaintiffs to enter into the Settlement Agreement. The plaintiffs' consent was vitiated by fraud, entitling them to restitution of sums paid and damages for lost opportunity. Affirmation and waiver did not apply due to the continuing concealment and lack of full knowledge by the plaintiffs.

Citation
[2022] JRC 202
Parties
First Plaintiff: Mr Hore; Second Plaintiff: Little Wing; First Defendant: Mr Valmorbida; Second Defendant: AVA Holdings Limited (the Company)
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
30 September 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil / Final Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiffs
Legal Topics
Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Deceit, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Vitiation of Consent, Waiver and Affirmation, Restitution, Damages, Termination of Contract
Contract Law Fraud Company Law Trusts Fraudulent Misrepresentation Deceit Breach of Fiduciary Duty Vitiation of Consent +4 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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Hore

First Plaintiff

Little Wing

Second Plaintiff

Mr Valmorbida

First Defendant

AVA Holdings Limited (the Company)

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Final Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr Valmorbida committed fraud (dol) and deceit against the plaintiffs
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiffs' consent to the Settlement Agreement was vitiated by fraud
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to restitution and damages for lost opportunity

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that Mr Valmorbida committed fraud and deceit by making false representations, concealing material facts, and misusing company assets, which induced the plaintiffs to enter into the Settlement Agreement. The plaintiffs' consent was vitiated by fraud, entitling them to restitution of sums paid and damages for lost opportunity. Affirmation and waiver did not apply due to the continuing concealment and lack of full knowledge by the plaintiffs.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiffs

Orders

  • The Settlement Agreement is set aside for fraud.
  • Mr Valmorbida is ordered to pay $15,633,334 to the plaintiffs by way of restitution.