Miller -Foulds v Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs [2008] EWHC 3443 (Ch) (20 November 2008)

Miller -Foulds v Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs [2008] EWHC 3443 (Ch) (20 November 2008)

The court held that there is adequate secondary evidence, including authenticated copies and oral testimony, to prove the existence and terms of the 1991 possession order. The court records were properly kept and destroyed in accordance with statutory requirements. The proceedings are an abuse of process as they fail to join all relevant parties and the relief sought would serve no useful purpose.

Citation
[2008] EWHC 3443 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Miller-Foulds; Defendant/appellant: The Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 November 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil (chancery Division) / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim dismissed as wholly without merit and abusive.
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Declaratory Relief, Secondary Evidence, Possession Orders, Court Records, Statutory Duty
Civil Procedure Property Law Abuse of Process Declaratory Relief Secondary Evidence Possession Orders Court Records Statutory Duty

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Miller-Foulds

Claimant/respondent

The Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil (chancery Division) / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there is evidence of the existence or effect of a 1991 possession order allegedly made by Brentford County Court against the claimant.
  2. 2 Whether the court records and secondary evidence suffice to prove the making and terms of the 1991 order.
  3. 3 Whether the proceedings are an abuse of process due to failure to join all relevant parties and lack of practical utility.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that there is adequate secondary evidence, including authenticated copies and oral testimony, to prove the existence and terms of the 1991 possession order. The court records were properly kept and destroyed in accordance with statutory requirements. The proceedings are an abuse of process as they fail to join all relevant parties and the relief sought would serve no useful purpose.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed as wholly without merit and abusive.

Orders

  • Claims dismissed.
  • Permission to appeal refused.