Re Baltic Estate Ltd (No 2)
[1992] BCC 629, 636, “conduct may be prejudicial without being unfair” (to similar effect see Peter Gibson J in
- Mr Justice Foxton :
- The background
- The relevant arbitration and jurisdiction agreements
- The proper approach on a s.9 application
- Buildmaster Construction Services) v Islamic Press
- The approach to overlapping dispute resolution clauses
- BNP Paribas v Trattamento Rifiuti Metropolitani SpA
- Risk Group
- Sebastian Holdings
- Group
- Nordbank
- Savona
- Trattamento
- Services Ltd v Upaid
- UBS AG v HSH Nordbank AG
- UBS AG
- Kaltim Prima Coal
- Exploration Corp
- Analysis and conclusion
- The test for summary judgment
- Easyair Limited v Opal Telecom Limited
- Swain v Hillman
- ED & F Man Liquid Products v Patel
- Hillman
- ED & F Man
- Liquid Products v Patel
- Royal Brompton Hospital NHS Trust v Hammond (No 5)
- Pharmaceutical Co 100 Ltd
- ICI Chemicals & Polymers Ltd v TTE Training Ltd
- EIGL’s factual complaints in more detail
- Introduction
- The parties’ arguments in summary
- Arbuthnott v Fagan
- Is the right of set-off excluded by the SpA?
- Restaurants Ltd v. Indoor Leisure Ltd
- Investments Ltd
- In re Nortel GmbH
- EIGL’s case in summary
- Relief for unfair prejudice
- The Disputed Payments involved mismanagement of Heritage “on behalf of Albion” and Albion’s “failure to disclose what had occurred”
- F & C Alternative Investments (Holdings) Ltd v Barthelemy and another
- (No 2)
- The mismanagement gave rise to unfair prejudice so far as EIGL is concerned, because EIGL has suffered prejudice which cannot be remedied notwithstanding EIGL’s majority control of Heritage
- Re Legal Costs Negotiators Ltd
- Re Bird Precision Bellows Ltd
- Cool Seas (Seafoods) Limited v. Interfish Limited
- Sikorski v Sikorski and another
- Cool Seas
- Re Blackwood Hodge plc
- Re a Company
- Legal Costs Negotiators Ltd
- Re Baltic Estate Ltd (No 2)
- Re Ringtower Holdings
- The range of relief available in response to a petition for unfair prejudice is very broad, and includes a power to order Albion to compensate EIGL for its losses
- Call
- Re Chime Corp Ltd; Kung v Kou
- Foss v Harbottle
- Re Chime Corp Ltd
- Re Charnley Davies Ltd (No 2
- Is there a serious issue to be tried that the amount of such compensation in this case equals or exceeds the amount of Albion’s claim?
- The unfair prejudice claim is sufficiently closely connected with Albion’s claim to meet the test of equitable set-off
- Metaalconstructive NV v Simon Carves Ltd
- Aectra Refining & Marketing Inc v Exmar NV
- Stay