REACTEC LTD AGAINST CUROTEC TEAM LTD [2021] ScotCS CSOH_72 (16 July 2021)

REACTEC LTD AGAINST CUROTEC TEAM LTD [2021] ScotCS CSOH_72 (16 July 2021)

RTGH did not have the whole interest in the litigation for all practical purposes nor complete control; its interest as shareholder and creditor was indirect and insufficient; the defender retained its own interest and control; RTGH was not the real party in all but form and cannot be held liable as dominus litis.

Citation
[2021] ScotCS CSOH_72
Parties
Pursuer: Reactec Limited; Defender: Curotec Team Limited; Third Party/opposer: Rebound Technology Group Holdings Limited; Third Party/reserved: Michael Jones
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
16 July 2021
Procedural Posture
Intellectual Property Action / Post Proof Before Answer; Motion for Non Party Expenses Order
Outcome
motion refused
Legal Topics
Patent Infringement, Dominus Litis, Non Party Costs Orders, Corporate Control, Liability for Litigation Expenses
Intellectual Property Company Law Civil Procedure Patent Infringement Dominus Litis Non Party Costs Orders Corporate Control Liability for Litigation Expenses

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Reactec Limited

Pursuer

Curotec Team Limited

Defender

Rebound Technology Group Holdings Limited

Third Party/opposer

Michael Jones

Third Party/reserved

Procedural Posture

Intellectual Property Action / Post Proof Before Answer; Motion for Non Party Expenses Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether RTGH is liable for expenses as dominus litis
  2. 2 Whether RTGH had whole interest and control in the litigation
  3. 3 Whether corporate structure and funding confer dominus litis status

Ratio Decidendi

RTGH did not have the whole interest in the litigation for all practical purposes nor complete control; its interest as shareholder and creditor was indirect and insufficient; the defender retained its own interest and control; RTGH was not the real party in all but form and cannot be held liable as dominus litis.

Court Disposition

motion refused

Orders

  • RTGH not found liable for expenses as dominus litis
  • No order against Michael Jones at this stage