The claimant appealed against a decision to strike out her claim for want of prosecution, and a failure to pay a sum ordered as security for costs. She had put jewelry with the defendants for safe keeping, and alleged it had been stolen. The lock on her safety deposit box had changed. During complex procedures, … Continue reading Nasser v United Bank of Kuwait: CA 21 Dec 2001
The claimant appealed saying that on an application under Rule 3.4, the judge had without forewarning him struck out his case under part 24. Held: There is an overlap between the summary judgment and strike out jurisdictions to the extent that the court may treat an application under CPR 3.4(2)(a) as if it was an … Continue reading Moroney v Anglo-European College of Chiropractice: CA 1 Nov 2009
The court’s powers under the new CPR to deal with non-compliance with time limits, were wide enough to allow the court to allow re-instatement of an action previously struck out. The court could find alternative ways of dealing with any delay which could recompense the other party and seek to achieve justice as between the … Continue reading Biguzzi v Rank Leisure Plc: CA 26 Jul 1999
Where an action was commenced before the new rules came into effect, but an application to strike out an action was issued and decided after they came into effect, that application could not be decided under the old rules. The new rules applied fundamentally different tests, and these tests had to be applied.Assessment of respective … Continue reading Axa Insurance Co Ltd v Swire Fraser Ltd: CA 9 Dec 1999
The defendant sought to have struck out the claim on the basis that delay made a fair trial impossible. Warren J [2006[ EWHC 3697 (Ch) Bailii Civil Procedure Rules 3.492) England and Wales Litigation Practice Updated: 09 January 2022; Ref: scu.263664
Appeal by the claimants from the order of Simon J by which he ordered on summary judgment applications by the defendants that (1) the claimants are not entitled to rely on section 32(1)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980; and the claims are time barred pursuant to sections 2 and 9 of the 1980 Act insofar … Continue reading Arcadia Group Brands Ltd and Others v Visa Inc and Others: CA 5 Aug 2015
Application to strike out a claim pursuant to Civil Procedure Rule 3.4(2) on the basis that it discloses no reasonable grounds for bringing the claim and/or because it is an abuse of process. Her Honour Judge Sarah Watson  EWHC 2948 (TCC) Bailii Civil Procedure Rules 3.4(2) England and Wales Litigation Practice Updated: 31 December … Continue reading Crest Nicholson Operations Ltd and Another v Grafik Architects Ltd and Another: TCC 10 Nov 2021
An application was made to strike out the claim when the action had begun nearly 14 years before, but had not yet concluded. The defendant argued that the delay amouned to an abuse of process. Additionally the parties disputed the admission of expert evidence. The defendant argued that the claimant’s expert had gone beyond his … Continue reading Wearn (T/A Jonathan Wearn Productions) v HNH International Holdings Ltd: ChD 29 Oct 2014
The federal government sought to recover properties from the defendants which it said were the proceeds of corrupt behaviour by the principal defendant who had been State Governor of a province. The claimant sought summary judgment. Held: Summary judgment was refused. The witness statements were admitted to contain contradictory and unreliable evidence, and the allegations … Continue reading Nigeria v Santolina Investment Corp and others: ChD 7 Mar 2007
A claim was made against directors of a company involved in a takeover, for failure to make proper disclosure. The case involved also other issues. The defendants appealed against a refusal to strike out the claim. Held: The rules made specific reference to cases in areas of law involving developing jurisprudence. This was one such, … Continue reading Wragg and Another v Partco Group Ltd UGC Ltd: CA 1 May 2002
The defendant appealed against a refusal to strike out the claimant’s action saying that the claimant had been involved in a fraud upon the court in an earlier associated claim. Held: The Rule gave no power to strike out a claim on such a basis. The dishonest assertion of a claim by a co-claimant did … Continue reading Shah v Ul-Haq and Others: CA 9 Jun 2009
The respondent had made a personal injury claim, but had then been discovered to have wildly and dishonestly exaggerated the damages claim. The defendant argued that the court should hand down some condign form of punishment, and appealed against refusal of a strike out of the claim. The Court of Appeal said that it was … Continue reading Fairclough Homes Ltd v Summers: SC 27 Jun 2012
The defendant published a web-site ‘Solicitors From Hell’. Judgment had been entered against the defendant, as to a complaint falsely attributed to a client of the claimant. The defendant made a further application.
Held: ‘I asked Mr Kordowski . .
The claimant was a police informer. Over several years he had given and been paid for information. He claimed that on one occasion he had given information which had led to the arrest of a major criminal, but the police denied that any information . .
EAT This was a request for strike-out of an entitlement reference, prior to the formal evidence rounds, on the grounds that the statement of case provided by the claimant did not clearly identify the inventive . .
Defendant’s application for strike out elements of claimant’s case – granted in part.
Held: The court summarised the core principles in considering an application to strike out a defence, saying that it: ‘ . . calls for analysis of the . .
Appeal against dismissal of claim for damages on basis that it was an abuse being a second attempt to litigate a matter already decided. . .
The claimant sought damages for defamation. He feared arrest and extradition to the US if he came to England, and was granted an order allowing him to give evidence by video link. The defendant appealed that order. Held: There was no absolute rule which would allow the order made. The judge had considered that if … Continue reading Polanski v Conde Nast Publications Limited: CA 11 Nov 2003
An employment tribunal had no power to dismiss a claim as without a reasonable prospect of success before it was begun to be heard. The power to regulate its own hearings did not include such a power, and the power to dismiss a claim as frivolous or vexatious, or for failure to comply with directions … Continue reading Care First Partnership Ltd v Roffey and Others: CA 22 Nov 2000
The Court was asked whether a Limited Liability Partnership (‘LLP’) of solicitors, which is a party to litigation and acts as its own legal representative in the proceedings, is a litigant in person within CPR 46 and so can only recover the level of costs allowed to litigants in person under CPR 46.5(2) and PD46 … Continue reading Halborg v EMW Law Llp: CA 23 Jun 2017
In the course of unfair dismissal proceedings, the defendant had disclosed possession of confidential materials of his former employer. The employer began these proceedings based on the materials. Only at a later point when he appointed solicitors was a challenge to made to that use as contempt. The company now appealed against the strike out … Continue reading IG Index Ltd v Cloete: CA 31 Jul 2014
The defendant applied to have struck out the claim, saying that it was based upon a misuse of documents disclosed during an employment tribunal case, and was an abuse since the claimants had not sought the permission of the Tribunal for a second use of disclosed information. The defendant said that the information had been … Continue reading IG Index Plc v Cloete: QBD 11 Dec 2013
‘The power of the court to strike out a statement of case under CPR 3.4(2)(a) – and the related power to give summary judgment under CPR 24.2 – has an important place in the disposal of claims in accordance with the Civil Procedural Rules. The exercise of those powers, in an appropriate case, gives effect … Continue reading Independents’ Advantage Insurance Company Ltd v Cook and Another: CA 24 Jul 2003
Application to strike out claim as an abuse of process. The claim was for asbestos related condition leading to the death of the claimant’s husband. The defendants denied liability and causation, saying that he had been a confirmed smoker. The post mortem had found asbestos fibres. The defendants complained that the actions of the claimants … Continue reading Matthews v Collins (T/A Herbert Collins and Sons) and Others: QBD 4 Oct 2013
Misfeasance in Public Office – Recklessness The bank sought to strike out the claim alleging misfeasance in public office in having failed to regulate the failed bank, BCCI. Held: Misfeasance in public office might occur not only when a company officer acted to injure a party, but also where he acted with knowledge of, or … Continue reading Three Rivers District Council and Others v Governor and Company of The Bank of England (No 3): HL 22 Mar 2001
The court considered the levels of meaning in an article falsely connecting the claimant with terrorist activity: ‘Once it is recognised that the article may be asserting no more than that in one way or another the respondents may unwittingly have assisted terrorists in the past and may by introducing more controls be able to … Continue reading Jameel, Abdul Latif Jameel Company Limited v The Wall Street Journal Europe Sprl (No 1): CA 26 Nov 2003
The claimants had begun copyright infringement cases. Having been refused a request to be allowed to withdraw the cases as an abuse, their solicitors now faced an application for a wasted costs order. Held: The court only has jurisdiction to make a wasted costs order when the impugned conduct has caused a waste of costs … Continue reading Media Cat Ltd v Adams and Others: PCC 18 Apr 2011