Empyrean Protocol

Empyrean Intelligence Console

← Back to briefs

SU Consultancy Ltd v Singh & Ors [2025] EWHC 564 (Comm) (12 March 2025)

Source: Open mirrored case · Original bailii.org

Sanctions — Geo —

Executive Summary

  • The case concerns SU Consultancy Ltd’s constructive trust over Miura Distribution Ltd’s business following an unlawful means conspiracy claim.
  • The Court confirmed damages for conspiracy assessed as of July 2020 and ordered an account of profits from that date to December 2024.
  • A key dispute is whether Miura’s acceptance of damages extinguishes its ongoing interest and entitlement to an account under the constructive trust.
  • The Court held that damages and account remedies are cumulative and Miura’s interest in the business persists until its return.
  • The ruling clarifies the interplay between tort damages and equitable remedies in business disputes involving constructive trusts.

Sanctions Highlights

  • No sanctions implications identified in this case.
  • No references to sanctions regimes or compliance issues.

Emerging Risks

  • Potential for prolonged litigation over the end date and scope of accounting in constructive trust claims.
  • Risk of double recovery claims if damages and accounts are not clearly delineated.
  • Uncertainty in commercial disputes where tort and trust remedies overlap, complicating resolution and enforcement.
  • Possible reputational risk for parties involved in protracted disputes over business ownership and profits.

Geopolitical Impact

  • No geopolitical significance or involvement of foreign states or international actors.
  • Case strictly concerns domestic commercial law within England and Wales jurisdiction.

Economic Intelligence

  • The case underscores the importance of precise valuation dates in damages claims, here fixed at July 2020.
  • Highlights the economic impact of constructive trusts in protecting business interests and profits post-breach.
  • Demonstrates judicial caution to avoid double recovery, balancing compensation and ongoing equitable interests.
  • Reflects commercial risks where business assets are transferred without authority, affecting valuation and profit accounting.

Strategic Recommendations

  • Litigants should clearly distinguish between tort damages and equitable remedies to avoid confusion and double recovery.
  • Parties holding business assets under constructive trust should prepare for ongoing accounting obligations until formal return.
  • Legal counsel should anticipate and address timing disputes over valuation and profit accounting in similar cases.
  • Businesses must maintain robust documentation to support claims of ownership, trust obligations, and profit entitlements.
  • Consider early negotiation on consequential orders post-judgment to minimize protracted disputes over remedies.

---

**Source Notes:**

Sanctions Intelligence Digest — [https://empyreanprotocol.com/litigation/view/www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Comm/2025/564.txt](https://empyreanprotocol.com/litigation/view/www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Comm/2025/564.txt)

Brief metadata