Peter Limb v Union Jack Removals Ltd & Anor [1998] EWCA Civ 200 (10 February 1998)

Peter Limb v Union Jack Removals Ltd & Anor [1998] EWCA Civ 200 (10 February 1998)

Order 9 Rule 10 of the County Court Rules 1981 does not apply to strike out actions for unliquidated damages where the defendant admits liability but not quantum unless the admission is delivered on Form N9; informal admissions or defences not on Form N9 do not trigger the administrative machinery of Rules 2, 3, 6, and 10(ii). In multi-defendant cases, if any defendant delivers a defence, admission, or counterclaim, the action cannot be struck out under Rule 10(i).

Citation
[1998] EWCA Civ 200
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Peter Limb; Defendant/respondent: Union Jack Removals Limited (In liquidation); Defendant/respondent: Jack Robert Honess; Plaintiff/respondent: Stephen McGivern; Defendant/applicant: K Brown; Plaintiff/respondent: Marie Partington; Defendant/appellant: Turners Bakery; Plaintiff/appellant: Daniel Pyne-Edwards; Defendant/respondent: Moore Large & Company Limited; Plaintiff/appellant: Pauline Smith; Defendant/respondent: Brothers of Charity Services; Plaintiff/respondent: Sharon Tomkins; Defendant/appellant: Rosemary Griffiths
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 February 1998
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (multiple Joined Appeals) / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeals and applications dismissed or allowed as per individual cases; main appeal (Limb v Union Jack Removals Ltd & Honess) allowed; other applications/appeals dismissed.
Legal Topics
County Court Rules, Default Judgments, Admissions, Striking Out Actions, Personal Injury Procedure
Civil Procedure County Court Rules Default Judgments Admissions Striking Out Actions Personal Injury Procedure

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 5 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Limb

Plaintiff/appellant

Union Jack Removals Limited (In liquidation)

Defendant/respondent

Jack Robert Honess

Defendant/respondent

Stephen McGivern

Plaintiff/respondent

K Brown

Defendant/applicant

Marie Partington

Plaintiff/respondent

Turners Bakery

Defendant/appellant

Daniel Pyne-Edwards

Plaintiff/appellant

Moore Large & Company Limited

Defendant/respondent

Pauline Smith

Plaintiff/appellant

Brothers of Charity Services

Defendant/respondent

Sharon Tomkins

Plaintiff/respondent

Rosemary Griffiths

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (multiple Joined Appeals) / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Order 9 Rule 10 of the County Court Rules 1981 applies to actions for unliquidated damages where the defendant admits liability but not quantum
  2. 2 Whether an action can be struck out under Order 9 Rule 10 where a defence or admission has been delivered by one of multiple defendants
  3. 3 Whether an admission not on Form N9 constitutes an 'admission' for the purposes of Order 9 Rules 2, 3, 6, and 10(ii)

Ratio Decidendi

Order 9 Rule 10 of the County Court Rules 1981 does not apply to strike out actions for unliquidated damages where the defendant admits liability but not quantum unless the admission is delivered on Form N9; informal admissions or defences not on Form N9 do not trigger the administrative machinery of Rules 2, 3, 6, and 10(ii). In multi-defendant cases, if any defendant delivers a defence, admission, or counterclaim, the action cannot be struck out under Rule 10(i).

Court Disposition

Appeals and applications dismissed or allowed as per individual cases; main appeal (Limb v Union Jack Removals Ltd & Honess) allowed; other applications/appeals dismissed.

Orders

  • Declaration that action not struck out under Order 9 Rule 10 in Limb v Union Jack Removals Ltd & Honess; costs orders as specified, not to be enforced without leave where party is legally aided; legal aid taxation of costs where applicable; renewed application for leave to appeal in McGivern v Brown dismissed with...