Radford & Anor v Frade & Ors
2014
QUEEN’S BENCH DIVISION
United Kingdom
CORAM
- SIR DAVID EADY
Areas of Law
- Contract Law
- Civil Procedure
- Evidence Law
2014
QUEEN’S BENCH DIVISION
United Kingdom
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
Michael Radford and his spouse's partnership initiated a lawsuit over disputes related to the Spanish film 'La Mula'. Various agreements were signed with multiple defendants for the film's production, leading to a series of legal challenges, including claims for defamation, fraud, and conspiracy. Master Eyre granted a summary judgment for the Fourth and Fifth Defendants, while a later appeal challenged this decision as well as the associated cost awards. The court refused the appeal, maintaining that the Master’s decisions were appropriate and justified.
Judgment
Sir David Eady :
On 20 June 2014 I heard an application by the Claimants for permission to appeal against an order of Master Eyre dated 14 January 2014, whereby he granted the Fourth and Fifth Defendants summary judgment on the claim and refused to permit a very late amendment, of which a draft was produced on the second day of the hearing before him, for the purpose of relying upon a new case based on alleged breach of contract. He also set aside a default judgment on the Fourth and Fifth Defendants’ counterclaim and they do not seek to challenge that ruling. The Claimants also seek permission to appeal in respect of the costs order. The Master gave written reasons in respect of the strike-out on 7 February of this year.
It is now common ground that the First to Third Defendants were never served with these proceedings (a concession made in May 2012) and it has always been accepted that the Sixth to Ninth Defendants were never served either. Accordingly I am only concerned with the position of the Fourth and Fifth Defendants (the Gheko companies).
As a matter of first impression, the Master’s ruling on the strike-out would appear to be a robust case management decision of the kind which an appellate court would be slow to overturn. Furthermore, it is generally recognised that there is a wide discretion so far as the awarding of costs is concerned. On the other hand, the background to the matter needs to be considered in rather more detail, not least since it is suggested by the Claimants that the Master made errors of law.
A number of agreements came into existence with a view to the making of a Spanish film entitled La Mula based upon a novel about the Spanish Civil War. Michael Radford, the First Claimant, is a well known film director and the second Claimant is a partnership between him and his wife. It was a special purpose vehicle created with a view to exploiting Mr Radford’s talents and services. The First and Second Defendants (also husband and wife) are shareholders in the Fourth Defendant, of which the Fifth Defendant is a wholly owned subsidiary. The Sixth Defendant was a company incorporated and wholly owned by Mr Radford.
The screenplay was to be partially written by Mr Radford and the film directed by him. The intention was that it should be a European co-production. With that in mind, a co-production agreement was signed on 18 November 2008, which was expressed to be “within the framework of the European Convention on Cinemat