Dewji v Prudential International Assurance PLC [2025] EWHC 2988 (Ch) (13 November 2025)

Dewji v Prudential International Assurance PLC [2025] EWHC 2988 (Ch) (13 November 2025)

The appeal was allowed. The lower court erred in law by failing to apply the correct test for summary judgment and strike out, and by not engaging with whether the claim had a real prospect of success. On proper application of the legal principles, the majority of Mr Dewji's claims were time-barred and/or disclosed no reasonable grounds for bringing the claim. The factual disputes identified did not justify a trial where the pleadings and evidence could not support a realistic prospect of success. The claim was struck out and summary judgment entered for Prudential.

Citation
[2025] EWHC 2988 (Ch)
Parties
Respondent/claimant: Mr Mohammed Dewji; Appellant/defendant: Prudential International Assurance PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 November 2025
Procedural Posture
Appeal (from County Court) / Appeal Against Refusal to Strike Out or Grant Summary Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; claim struck out and summary judgment for defendant
Legal Topics
Breach of Contract, Misrepresentation, Negligence, Financial Conduct Authority Rules, Limitation of Actions, Summary Judgment, Strike Out Applications, Res Judicata
Contract Law Financial Services Regulation Tort Law Civil Procedure Breach of Contract Misrepresentation Negligence Financial Conduct Authority Rules +4 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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Mohammed Dewji

Respondent/claimant

Prudential International Assurance PLC

Appellant/defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal (from County Court) / Appeal Against Refusal to Strike Out or Grant Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim should be struck out or summary judgment granted for lack of real prospect of success
  2. 2 Whether the claim is time-barred under the Limitation Act 1980 or exceptions apply (deliberate concealment, mistake)
  3. 3 Whether the claims are res judicata due to prior Ombudsman determination

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was allowed. The lower court erred in law by failing to apply the correct test for summary judgment and strike out, and by not engaging with whether the claim had a real prospect of success. On proper application of the legal principles, the majority of Mr Dewji's claims were time-barred and/or disclosed no reasonable grounds for bringing the claim. The factual disputes identified did not justify a trial where the pleadings and evidence could not support a realistic prospect of success. The claim was struck out and summary judgment entered for Prudential.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; claim struck out and summary judgment for defendant

Orders

  • Claim struck out in its entirety
  • Summary judgment entered for Prudential International Assurance PLC