https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756318 Summary judgment in a contract dispute was considered only in part because the defendants' limitation objection and other defences raised triable issues. The court treated the principal balance as an admitted amount under the compromise, but held that the effect of the compromise, alleged breach and competing explanations required evidence; the first defendant was therefore ordered to deposit the admitted sum, failing which summary judgment would follow for that amount. The claimed interest at 15% per annum was not found to be summarily provable because the compromise documents did not clearly provide for it and the entitlement and rate required trial. Personal liability of the directors was also rejected for summary adjudication because they were not parties in their individual capacity to the underlying agreements. en-us Thu, 28 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 31 Jul 2024 17:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756318 Summary judgment in a contract dispute was considered only in part because the defendants' limitation objection and other defences raised triable issues. The court treated the principal balance as an admitted amount under the compromise, but held that the effect of the compromise, alleged breach and competing explanations required evidence; the first defendant was therefore ordered to deposit the admitted sum, failing which summary judgment would follow for that amount. The claimed interest at 15% per annum was not found to be summarily provable because the compromise documents did not clearly provide for it and the entitlement and rate required trial. Personal liability of the directors was also rejected for summary adjudication because they were not parties in their individual capacity to the underlying agreements. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Thu, 28 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756318