BL-2025-000785 - [2025] EWHC 2470 (Ch)
Chancery Division of the High Court

BL-2025-000785 - [2025] EWHC 2470 (Ch)

Fecha: 30-Sep-2025

The “Cape” defendants to the Park Proceedings

C.The “Cape” defendants to the Park Proceedings

6.

Cape plc” is the Third Defendant in these proceedings and Cape Intermediate Holdings LtdCIHL – the Second Defendant. They were the only Claimants in the proceedings before Mann J. The Mann J Judgment provides a description of the corporate personalities relevant to the proceedings before him, which I gratefully adopt, and summarise in the following sub-paragraphs:

i)

The Cape group is a group of companies that was formerly involved in asbestos mining and distribution. Those activities have now ceased, and the business of the group centres on the provision of critical industrial services focused on the energy and natural resources sectors. The group employs 12,800 employees across 17 countries. In the year ended 31 August 2023, the group had recorded revenue of £848.4m and a profit of £62.6m: Mann J Judgment/[8].

ii)

CIHL was incorporated in December 1893 under the name “The Cape Asbestos Company”. The Cape group has, historically, been involved in the mining and manufacture of asbestos until the group started to curtail those activities when the associated health risks became more widely known. Originally, CIHL conducted all of the business, but (over time) parts of its business were devolved to other companies in the group: Mann J Judgment/[9].

iii)

By 1961, CIHL was essentially a holding company. In May 1974, it changed its name to “Cape Industries Ltd” and changed it again to “Cape Industries plc” when it re-registered as a public company. There was a further name change to Cape plc in July 1989. In June 2011, the company’s name was changed once more to “Cape Intermediate Holdings plc” and then – on de-registration as a public company in December 2013 – to “Cape Intermediate Holdings Ltd”: Mann J Judgment/[10]. I shall use the term CIHL to refer indifferently to this company whatever name it may have used over its long history.

iv)

Cape plc was – as I have described – a former name of CIHL, abandoned as long ago as June 2011: see [6(iii)]. There is a Cape plc within the Cape group, but this is a company incorporated in Jersey in 2011: (Mann J Judgment/[1]). Mann J referred to this company as “Cape Jersey”) in preference to the term Cape plc (Mann J Judgment/[1]) because it appears that there is no intention, in the South Carolina proceedings, to bring claims against Cape Jersey, and that the reference to Cape plc is a reference to CIHL, but by an older (and now inaccurate) name: Mann J Judgment/[1], [138].

v)

Because of the confusion surrounding the constitution of the South Carolina proceedings, it is necessary (i) to say something about Cape Jersey and (ii) to stress that it was entirely right and proper that Cape Jersey was a claimant in the proceedings before Mann J and is now a defendant before me. The uncertainties in the constitution of the South Carolina proceedings render it necessary that the protection of the English courts (to the extent that such protection is appropriate) be considered not merely in relation to CIHL but also in relation to Cape Jersey.

vi)

Cape Jersey was formed in 2011. By virtue of a scheme of arrangement in that year it became the holding company of the Cape group, and has remained so ever since. It was incorporated in Jersey, but listed on the London Stock Exchange, with a tax residence in Jersey and Singapore: Mann J Judgment/[11].

vii)

In 2017, the share capital of Cape Jersey was acquired by Altrad UK Ltd (the Second Claimant), an English company which is part of the Altrad group. That group is a very substantial group, employing over 60,000 employees worldwide. Its parent company is Altrad Investment Authority SAS (the First Claimant in these proceedings), incorporated in France. The founder and President of the Altrad group is Mr Mohed Altrad (the Seventh Claimant in these proceedings): Mann J Judgment/[11].