QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL |
||
B e f o r e :
(Sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge)
____________________
WEE LEONG LUM |
Claimant |
|
- and – |
||
BUN CHAN |
Defendant |
____________________
JOHN CARL TOWNSEND (instructed by LAWRENCE KURT) for the DEFENDANT for the hearing dates 29 and 30 June 2020
G PRICE ROWLANDS (instructed by LAWRENCE KURT) for the DEFENDANT for the hearing dates 7, 8, 9 July
Hearing dates: 29 and 30 June 2020 and 7, 8 and 9 July 2020
____________________
Crown Copyright ©
HHJ WALDEN-SMITH:
The Background
The Proceedings
(i) Diverting payments due to NewCo to his own personal bank accounts and to the bank accounts of OldCo over which he had retained control; and
(ii) Diverting business opportunities that had come to his attention whilst serving NewCo as its manager.
Quantum
(i) The loss in the value of NewCo;
(ii) Money that ought to have been paid to NewCo that he contends was diverted to the defendant;
(iii) Cash jobs which were diverted from NewCo to the defendant.
Lost Value of NewCo
"In the well-known case of Armory v Delamirie (1722) 1 Stra 505… the Chief Justice directed the jury that unless the defendant produce the jewel and show it not to be of the finest water, they should presume the strongest against him, and make the value of the best jewels the measure of their damages: which they accordingly did.
It has been recognised in subsequent authorities that in so directing the jury the Chief Justice was applying a general principle to the effect that, in a case where the defendant has wrongfully deprived the claimant of property of value (be it an item of physical property or a chose in action), the court will, save to the extent that it is persuaded otherwise by the defendant, assess the value of the missing property on a basis which is generous to the claimant.
I respectfully agree that the principle in Armory v Delamirie is not directed at the legal burden of proof, rather it raises an evidential (i.e. rebuttable) presumption in favour of the claimant which gives him the benefit of any relevant doubt. The practical effect of that is to give the claimant a fair wind in establishing the value of what he had lost."
Gross Profit
Money Diverted from NewCo
Monies the claimant is entitled to recover
Freezing Injunction
Interest and costs