Sevilleja v Marex Financial Ltd

rdf:langString Sevilleja v Marex Financial Ltd

rdf:langString Sevilleja v Marex Financial Ltd

rdf:langString The Supreme Court

rdf:langString [2020] UKSC 31

rdf:langString Carlos Sevilleja Garcia v Marex Financial Ltd

rdf:langString

rdf:langString insolvency

rdf:langString fraudulent conveyance

rdf:langString reflective loss

rdf:langString rule in Foss v Harbottle

rdf:langString Sevilleja v Marex Financial Ltd [2020] UKSC 31 is a judicial decision of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom relating to company law and the rule against reflective loss. The issue which the court had to resolve was whether the creditors of a company could claim against a third party who had asset-stripped the company, or whether their claims were barred by the fact that the company was proper plaintiff under the rule in Foss v Harbottle and thus their claim should be barred as reflective loss. All seven judges agreed that the rule against reflective loss did not apply to creditors and that the claim could proceed. However "the bulk of the judgment" related to the proper application of the rule against reflective loss. On this issue the court split, 4:3. The minority simply wanted to abolish the rule, but the majority were content to reform the rule, disapproving or overruling various statements which had been made in Johnson v Gore Wood & Co [2002] 2 AC 1 and subsequent cases. In particular the majority held that the subsequent decisions in Giles v Rhind [2003] Ch 618, Perry v Day [2004] EWHC 3372 and Gardner v Parker [2004] EWCA Civ 781 were all wrongly decided.

rdf:langString [2018] EWCA Civ 1468

rdf:langString Lord Hodge

rdf:langString Lord Reed

rdf:langString Lord Sales