CL-2018-000297, CL-2018-000404, CL-2018-000590, - [2025] EWHC 2364 (Comm)

SKAT alleged that each of the Godson Ds and Mr Fletcher was liable under English law for (a) deceit, (b) conspiracy to injure by unlawful means, (c) dishonest assistance, (d) knowing receipt, and (e) unjust enrichment (by reason of mistake of fact induced by fraud).

Declarations and other relief were also sought against the Godson Ds and Mr Fletcher on the basis of alleged proprietary claims, under English law.

The Godson Ds and Mr Fletcher contended that the claims against them are governed by Danish law, alternatively New York law. However, they pleaded no case as to the content of New York law and did not seek permission to adduce or seek in fact to adduce any evidence of that law. Like the Jain Ds, Mr Fletcher and the Godson Ds abandoned and withdrew their plea as to Danish law prior to any expert evidence of Danish law being called at trial, and agreed to the determination of SKAT’s claims against them on the basis of English law. For them also, therefore, SKAT’s claims under Danish law, pleaded strictly in the alternative, fell away.