Taktouk v Semaan

The High Court has given summary judgment dismissing a claim by Mr Taktouk against his ex-wife arising out of the sale of their matrimonial home to Cesc Fabregas.

In divorce proceedings, Ms Semaan had obtained an order for an ancillary relief payment of £1.4m to be paid in the first instance from the proceeds of the sale of the matrimonial home, which was to be conducted by her. In March 2013 she proposed to sell the property to a company owned by Mr Fabregas, her new partner.

Mr Taktouk sought to restrain that sale on the grounds that it was at an undervalue, but in May 2013 Coleridge J dismissed his application and permitted the sale to proceed.

Mr Taktouk then brought a claim against Ms Semaan alleging breach of fiduciary duty in connection with the sale. Ms Semaan applied for summary judgment on the grounds of res judicata, or alternatively an order under the jurisdiction in Investment Invoice Financing Ltd v Limehouse Board Mills Ltd [2006] 1 WLR 985 that the claim be stayed until Mr Taktouk had paid the costs of the earlier proceedings.

The High Court (Richard Snowden QC) held that the claim was barred by issue estoppel: the issue of substance which it raised had been determined by Coleridge J in May 2013. It did not matter that the first hearing was different in nature or that the precise legal arguments advanced in the new claim were different.

The Judge also indicated that he would have stayed the claim pending the payment of the costs of the original application, and dismissed Mr Taktouk’s arguments that such an order would infringe his Article 6 rights.

Alan Maclean QC and Tom Cleaver appeared for the successful applicant.