Chellapermal v The Financial Conduct Authority & Ors [2019] EWHC 2260 (Ch) (23 August 2019)

Chellapermal v The Financial Conduct Authority & Ors [2019] EWHC 2260 (Ch) (23 August 2019)

The claim is struck out as an abuse of process because it seeks to re-litigate a proprietary claim to restrained funds already determined by the Crown Court, and because the statutory scheme under POCA provides the appropriate route for appeal or challenge. The High Court's jurisdiction is not ousted, but it is an abuse to circumvent the statutory process and to seek a second bite at the cherry in a different forum.

Citation
[2019] EWHC 2260 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Mrs Shamilla Chellapermal; First Defendant: The Financial Conduct Authority; Second Defendant: Mr Dharam Prakash Gopee; Third Defendant: Miss Camilla Chellapermal
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 August 2019
Procedural Posture
Strike Out Application (abuse of Process) / First Instance, Post Pleadings, Pre Trial
Outcome
Claim struck out as abuse of process
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Issue Estoppel, Restraint Orders, Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, Jurisdiction, Declaratory Relief, Forum Shopping
Civil Procedure Financial Regulation Equity Abuse of Process Issue Estoppel Restraint Orders Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 Jurisdiction +2 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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs Shamilla Chellapermal

Claimant

The Financial Conduct Authority

First Defendant

Mr Dharam Prakash Gopee

Second Defendant

Miss Camilla Chellapermal

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Strike Out Application (abuse of Process) / First Instance, Post Pleadings, Pre Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim is an abuse of process as an attempt to re-litigate an issue already decided
  2. 2 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to determine proprietary claims to restrained funds under POCA
  3. 3 Whether the claim circumvents the statutory scheme for appeals under POCA

Ratio Decidendi

The claim is struck out as an abuse of process because it seeks to re-litigate a proprietary claim to restrained funds already determined by the Crown Court, and because the statutory scheme under POCA provides the appropriate route for appeal or challenge. The High Court's jurisdiction is not ousted, but it is an abuse to circumvent the statutory process and to seek a second bite at the cherry in a different forum.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out as abuse of process

Orders

  • Claim struck out pursuant to CPR 3.4(2) as an abuse of process
  • Application to adjourn refused