Advanced Multi-Technology for Medical Industry & Ors v Uniserve Limited
| Judge | Mr Nicholas |
| Neutral Citation | [2024] EWHC 1725 (Ch) |
| Year | 2024 |
| Court | Chancery Division |
| Counsel | David Lewis Kc,Edward Knight,David Walsh,Edward Mordaunt,Fraser Campbell |
| Date | 04 July 2024 |
Neutral Citation Number: [2024] EWHC 1725 (Ch)
Case No: BL-2021-000092
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS
OF ENGLAND AND WALES
Rolls Building
Fetter Lane
London, EC4A 1NL
4 July 2024
Before :
MR NICHOLAS THOMPSELL
sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Between :
(1) ADVANCED MULTI-TECHNOLOGY
FOR MEDICAL INDUSTRY
(2) CARAMEL SALES LIMITED
(3) DAVID POPECK
Claimants
- and –
UNISERVE LIMITED
-and -
MAXITRAC LIMITED
- and -
ANDREW STEAD
Defendant
Third Party
Fourth Party
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
David Lewis KC and Edward Knight (instructed by Trowers & Hamlins LLP)
for the Claimants
David Walsh and Edward Mordaunt (instructed by Holman Fenwick Willan LLP)
for the Defendant
Fraser Campbell (instructed by Capital Law Limited)
for the Third and Fourth Parties
Hearing dates: 13 – 24 May 2024
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
JUDGMENT
Approved Judgment:Advanced Multi-Technology for Medical Industry & ors v Uniserve Limited
Deputy Judge Nicholas Thompsell:
1. INTRODUCTION
1.This case relates to events during a dark period for the world, when COVID-19 was
spreading rapidly across the globe and governments everywhere were improvising their
responses to this dreadful threat. A key element of this response was the procurement of
Personal Protection Equipment ("PPE") including masks.
2.I shall refer to the First Claimant by its trading name, “Hitex”. Hitex was a
manufacturer of medical supplies in Jordan. Early in 2020 it turned to the production of
medical masks. Hitex entered into a contract for the sale and purchase of masks (the
“Supply Contract”) with the Defendant ("Uniserve") at the height of the COVID-19
pandemic in April2020. The contract had been arranged by the Second Claimant,
which I will refer to as “Caramel” acting through the Third Claimant, (“Mr Popeck”),
who was and remains Caramel’s sole shareholder and director. These parties were to be
rewarded by Uniserve by means of an introduction and supply agreement (“the
Commission Contract”) entered into alongside the Supply Contract.
3.Mr Popeck was anexperienced businessman who operated principally within the
fashion trade acting generally as a middleman buying from manufacturers or other
wholesalers and selling to retailers. At this point he had had no experience in supplying
PPE, but he was astute to the opportunity for profit caused by the soaring demand for
PPE that was evident by this time.
4.Uniserve is an English company which, at that time, had focused on providing logistical
supportinrelationtothe transport of goods. It was well connected with the UK
Department of Health and Social Care (the “DHSC”) and also saw the opportunity to
profit by moving into the supply of PPE.
5.Under the Supply Contract, Hitex agreed to supply 80 million masks to Uniserve on
various dates in April to July 2020. Hitex claims that Uniserve, in breach of contract,
failed to receive and pay for the great majority of the masks and claims damages of
US$23,100,000 and interest.
6.Uniserve’s defence is that Hitex failed to meet its contractual obligations as regards
delivery of the masks and that it terminated the Supply Contract for Hitex’s breaches.
7.Uniserve has a counterclaim against Hitex for the sum of US$300,000 which it paid to
Hitex in respect of an invoice which was assigned to Caramel and also claims that it
was induced to enter into the Supply Contract and the CommissionContract by a
fraudulent or negligent misrepresentation.
8.Caramel and Mr Popeck also claim £19,250,000 from Uniserve, which they contend is
due under the Commission Contract, or alternatively damages, and interest. Uniserve
denies that that, or any, sum is due under the Commission Contract or that it is in
breach of it.
9.The Third Party (“Maxitrac”) acted on behalf of Uniserve in arranging the Supply
Contract and later was involved in the management of that contract. The Fourth Party
(“Dr Stead”) was Maxitrac’s sole director and shareholder.
Page 1
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting