CMC & Ors v Forster & Anor [2017] JRC 141 (06 September 2017)

CMC & Ors v Forster & Anor [2017] JRC 141 (06 September 2017)

The second and third defendants have a reasonable cause of action against Mr Njonjo for contribution or indemnity based on alleged breaches of fiduciary duty and trust, regardless of whether he received benefits during phase 1 or phase 2 of the scheme. The claim is arguable and not suitable for strike out; matters of apportionment and particularisation are for trial and can be clarified after discovery.

Citation
[2017] JRC 141
Parties
Applicant: Mr Charles Njonjo; Second and Third Defendants/third Party Plaintiffs: RBC and Regent; First Plaintiff: CMC Holdings Ltd; Second Plaintiff: CMC Group Ltd; First Defendant/third Party: Martin Forster; Third Party: Estate of Jack Mordejay Benzimra; Third Party: Estate of Prahlai Kalyani Jani; Third Party: Jeremiah Kiereini
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
06 September 2017
Procedural Posture
Application to Strike Out Third Party Proceedings / Ruling on Strike Out Application
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Strike Out Application, Unjust Enrichment, Contribution and Indemnity, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Constructive Trust
Civil Procedure Equity Company Law Strike Out Application Unjust Enrichment Contribution and Indemnity Breach of Fiduciary Duty Constructive Trust

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Charles Njonjo

Applicant

RBC and Regent

Second and Third Defendants/third Party Plaintiffs

CMC Holdings Ltd

First Plaintiff

CMC Group Ltd

Second Plaintiff

Martin Forster

First Defendant/third Party

Estate of Jack Mordejay Benzimra

Third Party

Estate of Prahlai Kalyani Jani

Third Party

Jeremiah Kiereini

Third Party

Procedural Posture

Application to Strike Out Third Party Proceedings / Ruling on Strike Out Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the third party proceedings against Mr Njonjo disclose a reasonable cause of action
  2. 2 Whether Mr Njonjo can be held liable for contribution or indemnity despite only receiving benefits during phase 2 of the scheme
  3. 3 Whether the pleadings sufficiently particularise breaches of duty or trust by Mr Njonjo

Ratio Decidendi

The second and third defendants have a reasonable cause of action against Mr Njonjo for contribution or indemnity based on alleged breaches of fiduciary duty and trust, regardless of whether he received benefits during phase 1 or phase 2 of the scheme. The claim is arguable and not suitable for strike out; matters of apportionment and particularisation are for trial and can be clarified after discovery.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Strike out application refused
  • Directions to be given for amendment of pleadings after discovery