- Conspiracy and deceit—dismissal of application for strike out/summary judgment (Raja v McMillan)
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Case details
Dispute Resolution analysis: The Court of Appeal has upheld the dismissal of an application for the strike out and/or summary judgment of claims of conspiracy to injure by unlawful means and deceit as a joint tortfeasor. The applicant, Mr McMillan, had argued that each claim was missing at least one essential legal element and was therefore not viable. Mr McMillan’s four grounds of appeal included an interesting point of law regarding the ability of a director to conspire with a company that is his alter ego. A conspiracy requires a combination or agreement between two or more persons acting autonomously. Mr McMillan maintained that ‘this requirement is not met when a puppet conspires with its puppet-master’ (para ). The Court of Appeal considered the point raised by Mr McMillan to be one of some difficulty, which required full exploration at trial. Similarly, arguments as to Mr McMillan’s knowledge and state of mind were factual matters plainly unsuitable for summary judgment. Written by Katie Dyson, senior associate at Gardner Leader LLP and Chris Felton, partner at Gardner Leader LLP.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial