The claimants sought damages, alleging that the defendants had abused the litigation process by issuing proceedings to challenge a grant of planning permission to the claimants not so as to defeat the grant, but by causing the claimants inconvenience and expense to put pressure on the claimants to provide the defendants with premises.
Held: The defendants application for summary judgement against the claimants succeeded.
Citations:
[2009] EWHC 577 (Ch), [2009] 13 EG 143
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Grainger v Hill CEC 1838
Misuse of Power for ulterior object
D1 and D2 lent C 80 pounds repayable in 1837, secured by a mortgage on C’s vessel. C was to be free to continue to use the vessel in the interim but the law forbade its use if he were to cease to hold its register. In 1836 the Ds became concerned . .
See Also – Fielder and Fladgate Llp v Westminster City Council Admn 27-Feb-2009
The claimants challenged the grant of planning permission for the development of land including the offices of which they were tenants. They said that the permission had been granted in error as to the application of the policy for providing . .
Cited by:
Appeal from – Land Securities Plc and Others v Fladgate Fielder (A Firm) CA 18-Dec-2009
The claimants wanted planning permission to redevelop land. The defendant firm of solicitors, their tenants, had challenged the planning permission. The claimants alleged that that opposition was a tortious abuse because its true purpose was to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Torts – Other
Updated: 21 October 2022; Ref: scu.347263
