Stewart v Engel and another
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 24 September 1999 |
| Date | 24 September 1999 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division |
QUEEN's BENCH DIVISION
Before Judge Raymond Jack, QC.
Insolvency - clause excluding liquidator's liability - negligence covered
A clause in a contract made between the liquidator of a company and a third party, which expressly provided that the liquidator had entered into the agreement as agent of the company and excluded any personal liability on the part of the liquidator, precluded the other party from claiming that the liquidator had acted negligently in performance of the contract.
Judge Raymond Jack, QC, sitting as a Queen's Bench Division judge in the Mercantile Court at Bristol, so held in a reserved judgment on September 24, when entering summary judgment for the defendant liquidators, Peter Engel and BDO Stoy Hayward, against the plaintiff, Dr Valerie Stewart, on the ground that the claim against them had no real prospect of success.
HIS LORDSHIP, having examined the relevant statutory provisions and authorities and concluded that the liquidator was acting as agent of the company, said that the plaintiff had contended that the clause expressly excluding personal liability was not apt to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Cie Noga d'Importation et d'Exportation SA v Abacha
-
Navitaire Inc. v Easyjet Airline Company and Another
...permit the pleadings to be amended, to hear further evidence, and to reconsider and if necessary reverse any judgment already given—see Stewart v Engel [2000] 1 WLR 2268. This jurisdiction, often called the Barrell jurisdiction (Re Barrell Enterprises [1973] 1 WLR 17), has survived the int......
-
North British Housing Association Ltd v Matthews and other appeals; London and Quadrant Housing Trust v Morgan
...a perfected order of the court. A judge can correct a judgment at any time before the court order is sealed or otherwise perfected: see Stewart v Engel [2000] 1 WLR 2268. But once the order has been drawn up, the judge has no function left to perform. Section 9 draws a clear distinction bet......
-
Briody v St Helens and Knowsley Area Health Authority
...sparingly' in accordance with the over-riding objective. Litigants are not to be allowed 'unlimited bites of the cherry'." (see, also, Stuart v Engel, [2000] 1 WLR 2268, from which these quotations were derived.) 49 Mummery LJ went on to indicate his support for the continuing validity of ......