Sullivan v Grout & Ors [2002] EWCA Civ 795 (30 April 2002)

Sullivan v Grout & Ors [2002] EWCA Civ 795 (30 April 2002)

The costs order made by Wright J was within the proper exercise of judicial discretion, given the partial success of the application. The strike out by Curtis J was justified due to Mr Sullivan's persistent and unjustified failure to comply with disclosure orders, and there was no error of law or misapplication of relevant considerations.

Citation
[2002] EWCA Civ 795
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Sidney Sullivan; First Defendant/respondent: Thomas Patrick Grout; Second Defendant/respondent: Sian Elizabeth Dallimore (aka Sian Elizabeth Parry); Third Defendant/respondent: National Westminster Bank PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 April 2002
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal and Application for Permission to Appeal / Appeal From Costs Order and Application for Permission to Appeal Strike Out Order
Outcome
Appeal against costs order dismissed; application for permission to appeal strike out order refused.
Legal Topics
Costs, Strike Out, Disclosure/discovery, Conversion, Assignment of Debts
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Costs Strike Out Disclosure/discovery Conversion Assignment of Debts

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sidney Sullivan

Claimant/appellant

Thomas Patrick Grout

First Defendant/respondent

Sian Elizabeth Dallimore (aka Sian Elizabeth Parry)

Second Defendant/respondent

National Westminster Bank PLC

Third Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal and Application for Permission to Appeal / Appeal From Costs Order and Application for Permission to Appeal Strike Out Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the costs order made by Wright J was within judicial discretion
  2. 2 Whether Curtis J was correct to strike out the claim for failure to comply with disclosure orders

Ratio Decidendi

The costs order made by Wright J was within the proper exercise of judicial discretion, given the partial success of the application. The strike out by Curtis J was justified due to Mr Sullivan's persistent and unjustified failure to comply with disclosure orders, and there was no error of law or misapplication of relevant considerations.

Court Disposition

Appeal against costs order dismissed; application for permission to appeal strike out order refused.

Orders

  • Appeal against the order of Wright J dismissed.
  • Application for permission to appeal against the order of Curtis J refused.