Lloyd v Hayward & Anor [2024] EWHC 2033 (Ch) (05 August 2024)

Lloyd v Hayward & Anor [2024] EWHC 2033 (Ch) (05 August 2024)

There was no abuse of process as the claimant did not act with the intention of indefinitely warehousing the claim; delays were not sufficient to justify strike out, especially given the court's own procedural failings and the conduct of both parties. Even if there had been abuse, striking out would not have been a proportionate or just response in the circumstances.

Citation
[2024] EWHC 2033 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Craig Lloyd; First Defendant: Richard Hayward; Second Defendant: Sirocco Holdings Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 August 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Business/property / Application to Strike Out Claim for Abuse of Process
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Strike Out Applications, Delay in Litigation, Joint Venture Disputes, Partnership Disputes
Civil Procedure Business Law Abuse of Process Strike Out Applications Delay in Litigation Joint Venture Disputes Partnership Disputes

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 3 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Craig Lloyd

Claimant

Richard Hayward

First Defendant

Sirocco Holdings Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Business/property / Application to Strike Out Claim for Abuse of Process

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's conduct amounted to an abuse of process by pursuing litigation without genuine intention to proceed to trial
  2. 2 Whether the claim should be struck out under CPR r. 3.4(2)(b)

Ratio Decidendi

There was no abuse of process as the claimant did not act with the intention of indefinitely warehousing the claim; delays were not sufficient to justify strike out, especially given the court's own procedural failings and the conduct of both parties. Even if there had been abuse, striking out would not have been a proportionate or just response in the circumstances.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Defendants' application to strike out the claim is refused.
  • Costs of the adjourned CCMC to be paid by the defendants to the claimant.