Binns v Firstplus Financial Group Plc

Binns v Firstplus Financial Group Plc

Where a claimant has already achieved full redress for their substantive claim through a free and effective ADR scheme, and the only remaining advantage of litigation is the potential recovery of costs, the court should strike out the claim as disclosing no reasonable grounds and as an abuse of process. Costs are adjunctive and not intrinsic to the claim itself.

Parties
Respondent (claimant): Christopher and Claire Binns; Appellant (defendant): Firstplus Financial Group PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 July 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Refusal to Strike Out Claim And/or Grant Summary Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; claim struck out in its entirety.
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Alternative Dispute Resolution (adr), Payment Protection Insurance (ppi), Strike Out Applications, Summary Judgment, Costs
Civil Procedure Consumer Protection Financial Services Abuse of Process Alternative Dispute Resolution (adr) Payment Protection Insurance (ppi) Strike Out Applications Summary Judgment +1 more

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Christopher and Claire Binns

Respondent (claimant)

Firstplus Financial Group PLC

Appellant (defendant)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Refusal to Strike Out Claim And/or Grant Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a county court claim should be struck out or summarily ended where the claimant has already received full redress under an ADR scheme but seeks to litigate for costs
  2. 2 Whether pursuing litigation solely for costs after full redress via ADR constitutes an abuse of process

Ratio Decidendi

Where a claimant has already achieved full redress for their substantive claim through a free and effective ADR scheme, and the only remaining advantage of litigation is the potential recovery of costs, the court should strike out the claim as disclosing no reasonable grounds and as an abuse of process. Costs are adjunctive and not intrinsic to the claim itself.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; claim struck out in its entirety.

Orders

  • The claim is struck out in its entirety.
  • The ADR offer under the FSA scheme remains open for acceptance.