or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments
High Court: (a) refuses an application by two respondents to a claim by a liquidator for a trial of preliminary issues, on the grounds that the grant of a preliminary trial would delay the substantive hearing and have the potential to complicate the substantive matter; and (b) determines that the case was appropriate for case management, and makes directions concerning interlocutory applications.
Applications by the first and second named respondents (“these respondents”) to the Court at this time are for orders directing the trial of preliminary issues or a modular trial - on 6th July, 2018, the applicant liquidator (“the liquidator”) applied for leave and was granted leave, despite submissions by way of objection only from Counsel for the second named respondent, to amend his points of claim by adding a prayer for “an order pursuant to s. 842 of the Companies Act 2014 that the first and/or second named respondent shall be subject to a disqualification order for such a period as this Honourable Court deems appropriate” - chronological summary - counsel for first respondent submitted that the liquidator’s claim was statute barred - Court concludes that these respondents are effectively requesting the Court to evaluate the strength of their statute-like pleas somewhat in vacuo - esult of the preliminary trial of issues could lead to an even longer drawn out conclusion to these proceedings than if the parties focused the resources and time of all involved, including that of the Court, on a plenary hearing - Court refuses the applications made by these respondents but will continue to case manage the proceedings so that they are ready for a plenary trial in 2019 - applications for preliminary trials by respondents refused.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.