Allsop v Banner Jones Ltd (t/a Banner Jones Solicitors)

Allsop v Banner Jones Ltd (t/a Banner Jones Solicitors)

The Court of Appeal held that the High Court judge erred in law by applying the Phosphate Sewage test to strike out the appellant's claims as abusive collateral attacks on a prior civil judgment. The correct test is whether relitigation would be manifestly unfair or bring the administration of justice into disrepute. The court reinstated certain claims where a reasonably arguable case was disclosed, particularly regarding negligent preparation and advice on interest rates, but upheld the strike-out of other claims where no arguable case or loss was shown.

Parties
Appellant (claimant Below): Terry Allsop; First Respondent (defendant Below): Banner Jones Limited trading as Banner Jones Solicitors; Second Respondent (defendant Below): Rae Cohen
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 January 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (business and Property Courts, Manchester) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part, dismissed in part
Legal Topics
Collateral Attack, Abuse of Process, Strike Out Applications, Summary Judgment, Solicitor Negligence, Breach of Contract, Financial Remedies in Divorce
Professional Negligence Family Law Civil Procedure Collateral Attack Abuse of Process Strike Out Applications Summary Judgment Solicitor Negligence +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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Terry Allsop

Appellant (claimant Below)

Banner Jones Limited trading as Banner Jones Solicitors

First Respondent (defendant Below)

Rae Cohen

Second Respondent (defendant Below)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (business and Property Courts, Manchester) to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court erred in striking out claims against solicitors and counsel for alleged negligence and breach of contract in the conduct of matrimonial financial remedy proceedings, on grounds of abuse of process and/or no reasonable cause of action.
  2. 2 Whether the 'Phosphate Sewage test' applies to collateral attacks on prior civil judgments in professional negligence claims.
  3. 3 Whether the pleaded allegations disclosed a reasonably arguable case of breach and causation.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that the High Court judge erred in law by applying the Phosphate Sewage test to strike out the appellant's claims as abusive collateral attacks on a prior civil judgment. The correct test is whether relitigation would be manifestly unfair or bring the administration of justice into disrepute. The court reinstated certain claims where a reasonably arguable case was disclosed, particularly regarding negligent preparation and advice on interest rates, but upheld the strike-out of other claims where no arguable case or loss was shown.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part, dismissed in part

Orders

  • Strike-out of allegations A8, A13, and E3 set aside; these claims may proceed subject to proper pleading.
  • Strike-out of allegations A10, A12(e), A12(h), C2, G1(b), and G1(c) upheld; these claims remain struck out.