Cookie consent

This website uses cookies to collect information about how you use this website. Atkin Chambers uses this information to make the website work as well as possible and improve the services provided by members and staff. You may choose to accept all cookies or chose to manage your cookie settings here:

Cookies on atkinchambers.com

Cookies are files saved on your phone, tablet or computer when you visit a website.

Atkin Chambers uses this information to make the website work as well as possible and improve the services provided by members and staff. You may choose to accept all cookies or chose to manage your cookie settings here:

Cookie settings

Atkin Chambers Limited use two types of cookie files, analytical cookies and necessary cookies. You can choose which cookies you are happy for us to use.

Analytical cookies that measure website use

Atkin Chambers Limited use Google Analytics to measure how you use the website so it can be improved based on user needs. Atkin Chambers do not allow Google to use or share the data about how you use this site.

Google Analytics sets cookies that store anonymised information about:

  • how you got to the site
  • the pages you visit on atkinchambers.com, and how long you spend on each page
  • what you click on while you’re visiting the site

Strictly necessary cookies

These essential cookies do things like remember your progress through a form (for example if you register for updates). They always need to be on.

Save changes

Paolo Castelli SPA v (1) Buckingham Securities & Investments LTD (2) Simon Halabi (2020) QBD (TCC) 12 June 2020

19th Jun 2020

Lucie Briggs successfully acted for the second defendant (Mr Halabi) in proceedings against him in relation to a dispute between Buckingham Securities & Investments LTD (“BSI”) and Paolo Castelli SPA(“PC”).

BSI had engaged PC to carry out refurbishment works at four properties pursuant to four JCT building contracts. The parties to the JCT Contracts were BSI (Employer) and PC (Contractor). PC sought damages arising out of the alleged wrongful termination of two of the contracts and BSI counterclaimed for sums said to be due under the contracts and damages for repudiatory breach.

PC brought proceedings against the second defendant, Mr Halabi, on the basis that he was the “disclosed principal” of BSI.

The second defendant applied to strike out the claim against him under CPR r 3.4(2)(a) on the grounds that the statement of case disclosed no reasonable grounds for bringing the claim.

HELD: The allegation that BSI had entered into the JCT contracts as agent for the second defendant as a disclosed principal was un-pleaded (save for the bare allegation). Having invited PC to present a potential amendment to plead out its claim over the lunch adjournment the court had to take into account the prospects of success of any proposed amendment and its timeliness. No proposed amendment was presented. Whilst there was some evidence about the beneficial ownership of BSI and how the second defendant chose to arrange his affairs, none of that was relevant to the claim that BSI had entered into the contracts on behalf of the second defendant as disclosed principal. Even if the second defendant was the beneficial owner of BSI, that would not make him liable under the contracts between PC and BSI. In addition PC had not brought forward an amendment to plead out how its case against the second defendant was put for the court to consider in the year since the pleadings had been filed. Since there was no coherent pleaded case against the second defendant, no amendment had been put forward in a timely fashion and it was not clear that any amendment with a prospect of success could be put forward, it was right to strike out the claim against the second defendant.

Lucie Briggs instructed by Decimus Fearon LLP for the second defendant.

12 June 2020





Related Juristictions

Register for updates

To keep in touch with news and updates from Atkin Chambers:

 

Register