April 22 2013
START DATE
END DATE
May 7 2013
Pitt & Company Limited and BGA Limited v. Gary White and Michael White
COURT:
LAW:
JUDGE(S):
CLAIMANT'S LAWYER:
DEFENDANT'S LAWYER:
The Supreme Court of Bermuda
CIVIL JURISDICTION
IAN R.C. KAWALEY CJ
Mr. Jai Pachai Wakefield Quin
Mr. Kim White Cox Hallett Wilkinson Limited
FACTS OF THE CASE:
Plaintiffs sought $1036349.59 from the Defendants for debts of two companies alleging Defendants were liable despite guarantees for only one company. Defendants applied to strike out the Writ and Statement of Claim claiming it failed to disclose a reasonable cause of action and was an abuse of the court process. The court found a reasonable cause of action was disclosed and refused to strike out the action on res judicata grounds but directed the Plaintiffs to re-amend their pleading for clarity on allegations of fraud and negligence.
SUMMARY:
Whether the Plaintiffs' claims were an abuse of process and whether the Amended Statement of Claim sufficiently particularized the allegations of fraud and negligence.
OUTCOMES:
The application to strike out the action on res judicata grounds is refused. Plaintiffs allowed to re-amend their Amended Statement of Claim for clarity on fraud and negligence allegations.
RULED IN FAVOUR OF:
Plaintiff/Claimant
PLAINTIFF/CLAIMANT
DEFENDANT:
DURATION (DAYS):
ISSUES:
RELEVANCE:
RULING:
RULING TYPE:
CASES CITED:
Join our pro membership and get all the details at your finger tips
Want to see full case details, including key arguments and claims? [Join Pro Membership] to unlock exclusive insights.
Discover the legal strategies and defenses used in this case. [Join Pro Membership] for full access.
How long did this legal battle last, and what key events happened? [Join Pro Membership] to find out.
Uncover the critical legal principles debated in this case. [Join Pro Membership] for in-depth analysis.
See why this case matters in Banking, Mortgages, and Financial Services. [Join Pro Membership] to explore its impact.
Find out the final judgment and its legal implications. [Join Pro Membership] to access the ruling.
Understand how this judicial ruling sets a precedent in law. [Join Pro Membership] for expert breakdowns.
See how past legal precedents influenced this case. [Join Pro Membership] to unlock the list.
Download Case Summary:
Explore:
EPHESIANS 6:16
PT Satria Tirtatama Energindo v. East Asia Company Limited and Bali Energy Limited
2016
RE: C (VARIATION OF ACCESS ORDER)
2015
In the Matter of IPOC Capital Partners Limited and others
2007
Hindsight law can make mistakes. Consider checking original case studies
Pitt & Company Limited and BGA Limited v. Gary White and Michael White
Plaintiffs sought $1036349.59 from the Defendants for debts of two companies alleging Defendants were liable despite guarantees for only one company. Defendants applied to strike out the Writ and Statement of Claim claiming it failed to disclose a reasonable cause of action and was an abuse of the court process. The court found a reasonable cause of action was disclosed and refused to strike out the action on res judicata grounds but directed the Plaintiffs to re-amend their pleading for clarity on allegations of fraud and negligence.