High Court clamps down on rogue US receiver

The High Court has issued a further judgment in the long-running Cape group dispute, building on last year’s decision by Mann J essentially refusing recognition (although not formally) of a South Carolina receivership over Cape Intermediate Holdings Ltd (CIHL). The new ruling confirms that the receiver purportedly appointed in South Carolina, Peter Protopapas, has no authority under English law and grants wide-ranging declaratory and injunctive relief to protect the Cape and Altrad groups from his continuing litigation in the United States. The Cape group is a group of companies formerly involved in asbestos mining and distribution. It has been owned by the Altrad group, a French construction group, since 2017.

The receiver commenced proceedings in South Carolina on behalf of CIHL against various CIHL and Altrad group companies, among others, and then sought declaratory relief from the London High Court as to the status of the receiver. The Court ultimately ruled that CIHL did not have a presence in South Carolina (or anywhere in the US for that matter) at the relevant time and that it had not submitted to the jurisdiction of South Carolina, meaning that there was no sufficient connection for the purposes of recognition of the South Carolina receivership.

Now, the High Court has ruled that a 2025 settlement agreement between the Cape and Altrad entities was valid and binding, extinguishing the claims Mr Protopapas is advancing in South Carolina based on the theory that the group forms a single economic unit with historic US asbestos affiliates, which was discredited in the English Court of Appeal’s decision in Adams v Cape Industries. The Court found that the receiver’s actions—taken in defiance of Mann J’s 2024 orders—were vexatious, and that his continued prosecution of the South Carolina proceedings was a collateral attack on the English Court of Appeal’s ruling in Adams v Cape Industries.

The High Court also took the opportunity to comment on the “shock expressed by the Supreme Court of South Carolina … at the infringement of comity apparently committed by the Mann J Order, which the High Court said would “abate on a proper understanding of the facts and matters lying behind the Mann J Order”. The Court also described certain assertions made by Mr Protopapas as “bombastic and immoderate and very far from the objective parsing of the facts that a court is entitled to expect”, and expressed serious concern that Mr Protopapas had failed to draw the decision of the English Court of Appeal in Adams v Cape Industries to the attention of the South Carolina Court.

Emphasising the need to protect both the integrity of the English jurisdiction and the Cape asbestos compensation scheme, Marcus Smith J granted declarations confirming the effectiveness of the settlement, reaffirmed that the South Carolina receivership “has no legal effect in England and Wales or worldwide,” and issued anti-suit injunctions restraining Mr Protopapas from taking further steps in the US actions.

Read the decision here.

Derrick Dale KC of Fountain Court Chambers and Angus Groom of South Square (instructed by Enyo Law LLP) represented Altrad Investment Authority SAS and others. William Willson of South Square (instructed by Signature Litigation LLP) acted for CIHL and Cape plc. Mr Protopapas did not appear.