British
and Irish Legal Information Institute
Freely Available British and Irish Public Legal Information
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
England and Wales High Court (Chancery Division) Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales High Court (Chancery Division) Decisions >> Covalis Capital LP & Anor v Banco BTG Pactual SA [2022] EWHC 1236 (Ch) (25 February 2022)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2022/1236.html
Cite as: [2022] EWHC 1236 (Ch)
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS OF ENGLAND AND WALES
BUSINESS LIST (ChD)
7 Rolls Buildings Fetter Lane London EC4A 1NL |
||
B e f o r e :
____________________
| (1) COVALIS CAPITAL LP (2) COVALIS CAPITAL LLP |
Claimants |
|
| - and - |
||
| BANCO BTG PACTUAL SA |
Defendant |
____________________
Unit 1 Blenheim Court, Beaufort Business Park, Bristol, BS32 4NE
Web: www.epiqglobal.com/en-gb/ Email: civil@epiqglobal.co.uk
(Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)
MS A DAY QC and MS J BOX (instructed by Reed Smith LLP) appeared on behalf of the Defendant
____________________
Crown Copyright ©
- THE MASTER: At the moment, I am not going to order an issue for disclosure in terms of issue 18, either as formulated in the DRD that is actually before me or on the basis of what Ms Hurst was formulating (it seemed to me somewhat on the hoof). What she suggested was, "Did the RWE plan become out of date before redemption of the fund and, if so, when?" or something along those lines.
- I am not persuaded that it is right to order disclosure in those terms because the parties have agreed -- and it seems to me properly agreed -- that we will have a trial in two stages with the issue of liability only (the breach of confidence trial) being tried at the first hearing. If one starts bringing issues about the staleness of the RWE plan or becoming out of date before redemption of the fund or when the confidentiality ceased, for the purposes of formulating the List of issues for Disclosure, it seems to me one starts to blur the different questions of liability versus causation and loss, which should be kept separate. If one does not do that, one starts to get into the realm where any savings from hiving off the issues for the liability trial as agreed between the parties begins to be undermined, so that seems to me the wrong way to go.
- So, for the reasons that have been submitted to me by Ms Day, I prefer the view that issues 1 to 29 are properly issues for the first-stage trial and 30 and 31 (and interest in so far as it is interest relating to the breach of confidence claim) will be issues only for stage 2. So, issues 30 and 31 will be reserved for the second stage. Therefore, for the reasons I have just set out, I am not persuaded that Issue 18 is a proper issue to be included in the List of Issues for Disclosure at the moment.