Description
A claim against an insolvency practitioner for allegedly failing to advise as to the possible criminal consequences of operating the same business under a new name under s. 216 of the Insolvency Act 1986 was not wholly subject to the ex turpi causa doctrine. The rule in Gray v Thames Trains that damages following a conviction are irrecoverable because they are caused by the sentence is limited only to the damages caused by the sentence rather than the conviction generally. The issue of whether or not the Claimant was morally culpable for the purposes of ex turpi causa was a matter that should be determined at trial and it would be inappropriate for the court to provide guidance on the level of moral culpability required.
