Public Record & Context

There is a substantial amount of publicly available information concerning litigation arising from a transaction connected with a business I sold in 2013.

Rather than ignore that history, I have set out my perspective and the relevant subsequent events here.

What the Court Decided

In January 2022, the High Court gave judgment against me in Manolete Partners Plc v Nag & Anor [2022] EWHC 153 (Ch), arising from transactions undertaken in 2013.

The court made serious findings against me.

I acknowledge the judgment and do not seek through this page to rewrite or overturn what the court decided.

What the Judgment Said About Professional Advice

An important part of the 2022 case concerned the professional legal advice surrounding the original transaction.

The judgment records my position that Devonshires had not advised me against the transaction, and that I had regarded this as confirmation that the transaction was proper.

There is an important qualification in the judgment which deserves to be read alongside the findings against me:

“However, I reach no concluded view on the matter, given that Devonshires are not a party to these proceedings and that Mr Ebsworth was not called as a witness.”

Manolete Partners Plc v Nag & Anor [2022] EWHC 153 (Ch)

Both points should be equally clear. The court nevertheless concluded that I had not established that reliance upon my solicitor enabled me to avoid liability.

What Happened Next

The professional-advice issue did not end with the 2022 judgment. A separate claim concerning the professional advice surrounding the underlying transaction was subsequently pursued.

That matter was ultimately resolved by a settlement.

The settlement did not constitute an admission of liability by the professional advisers and did not overturn, vary or reverse the 2022 judgment.

The Subsequent Chronology

After the 2022 judgment, I cooperated with Manolete in connection with its pursuit of the professional advisers involved in the original transaction.

That cooperation was practical rather than theoretical. I provided documentation and information in my possession to assist with that process, including financial and property-related information requested from me.

My position is that I did so because of what was communicated to me at the time concerning the pursuit of the professional advisers and the consequences for recovery against me. That is my account of the position as I understood it, and it later became relevant to the stance I took in subsequent enforcement proceedings. No court has determined that issue in my favour, and I do not suggest otherwise.

My Position

I do not suggest that the £600,000 settlement amounted to an admission of liability by the professional advisers, nor that it overturned the 2022 judgment against me.

But I believe the complete chronology matters: the 2022 court expressly reached “no concluded view” on the position concerning Devonshires, I then cooperated in the subsequent pursuit relating to that professional advice, and that separate dispute was resolved for £600,000.

Those facts do not rewrite the judgment. They are, however, an important part of what happened after it.

For several years I largely avoided publicly discussing this history. I have decided that acknowledging it and providing measured context is preferable to pretending it does not exist.

It represents a difficult chapter in my business career. It does not represent the entirety of that career, and it is not where my energy sits today. My focus is building Kasava across the UK and India, and attempting something considerably bigger than anything I have built before.

Ronojay Ronnie Nag