C. CHRISTO & CO LIMITED v NICHOLAS CHRISTOFOROU & Anor.
[2023] EWHC 1094 (KB)
Stephen David Margulies v Marcus Jonathan Margulies
10 November 2022
[2022] EWHC 2843 (Ch)
High Court
Two brothers fought over their dad's money. The brother bringing the lawsuit had already lost a similar case, so the judge threw out this one too because he didn't offer any new information.
Key Facts
- •Claimant and defendant are brothers involved in sixth set of proceedings concerning their late father's estate.
- •Previous proceedings (1997) alleging a secret trust were struck out.
- •Current claim alleges Alexander Margulies declared a trust of funds in a UBS account in favor of the claimant.
- •Defendant applied to strike out the claim under CPR 3.4(2)(a)-(c) or for summary judgment under CPR 24.2.
- •Claimant represented himself, defendant represented by counsel.
- •The claim centers around the UBS account in Switzerland and a BVI company, Dulwich Inc.
- •Claimant alleges tax evasion and concealment of assets by the defendant and his former solicitor.
Legal Principles
Res judicata (cause of action estoppel and issue estoppel)
Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd v Zodiac Seats UK Ltd [2013] UKSC 46; Paragon Finance Plc v DB Thakerar & Co [1999] 1 All ER 400; Spencer Bower and Handley: Res Judicata (5th edition); Arnold v National Westminster Bank [1991] 2 AC 93
Abuse of process (Henderson v Henderson)
Henderson v Henderson (1843) 3 Hare 100; Michael Wilson & Partners v Sinclair [2017] EWCA Civ 3
Summary judgment
Easyair Limited v Opal Telecom Limited [2009] EWHC 339 (Ch); Takhar v Gracefield Developments [2019] UKSC 13; Okpabi v Royal Dutch Shell plc [2021] UKSC 3; Lunggowe v Vedanta Resources plc [2019] UKSC 20
Secret trusts
Kasperbauer v Griffith (1997); Ottoway v Norman [1972] Ch 698
Without prejudice privilege
Motorola Solutions Inc v Hytera Communications Corpn Ltd [2021] EWCA Civ 11
Outcomes
Claim struck out.
The claim is barred by cause of action estoppel and/or issue estoppel. The claimant failed to demonstrate special circumstances to overcome the estoppel. Alternatively, the claim is an abuse of process.