Kuwait Oil Tanker Company SAK -v- Al Mutawa and Chadwick [2016] JRC 074 (30 March 2016)

Kuwait Oil Tanker Company SAK -v- Al Mutawa and Chadwick [2016] JRC 074 (30 March 2016)

The plaintiff's claim is not plainly and obviously unsustainable and is not bound to fail. There are sufficient factual disputes and criticisms of the first defendant's explanations regarding the source of funds, and the law permits proof by inference. These matters are fit for trial and cannot be resolved on a strike out application.

Citation
[2016] JRC 074
Parties
Plaintiff: Plaintiff (not named in excerpt); First Defendant: First Defendant (Nooria Mutawa); Second Defendant: Second Defendant (Trustee in Bankruptcy of Mr Al Bader)
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
30 March 2016
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory (application to Strike Out)
Outcome
application to strike out refused
Legal Topics
Strike Out Applications, Abuse of Process, Resulting and Constructive Trusts, Fraudulent Conveyance, Inference of Fact, Burden of Proof
Civil Procedure Trusts and Equity Bankruptcy Strike Out Applications Abuse of Process Resulting and Constructive Trusts Fraudulent Conveyance Inference of Fact +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 2 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Plaintiff (not named in excerpt)

Plaintiff

First Defendant (Nooria Mutawa)

First Defendant

Second Defendant (Trustee in Bankruptcy of Mr Al Bader)

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory (application to Strike Out)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff's claim should be struck out as being scandalous, frivolous, vexatious, or an abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff's case is obviously unsustainable for lack of evidence that funds used to acquire the property came from Mr Al Bader
  3. 3 Whether a claim based on inference is permissible in Jersey law

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff's claim is not plainly and obviously unsustainable and is not bound to fail. There are sufficient factual disputes and criticisms of the first defendant's explanations regarding the source of funds, and the law permits proof by inference. These matters are fit for trial and cannot be resolved on a strike out application.

Court Disposition

application to strike out refused

Orders

  • The first defendant's application to strike out the plaintiff's claim is dismissed.