Charles Ayeh-Kumi v Lord Chancellor

Charles Ayeh-Kumi v Lord Chancellor

The claimant's claims for damages and declarations regarding the conduct of family law proceedings and the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 are abusive, amount to an impermissible collateral attack on judicial decisions, and are out of time. No arguable breach of duty by the defendants is disclosed. The claim for a declaration of incompatibility under section 4 Human Rights Act 1998 is academic, misconceived, and bound to fail as the relevant statutory provisions are not incompatible with the ECHR.

Parties
Claimant/appellant: Charles Ayeh-Kumi; Defendant/respondent: Lord Chancellor; Defendant/respondent: Secretary of State for Justice
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 December 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Order Striking Out Claim, With Cross Appeal
Outcome
Claimant's appeal dismissed; Defendants' appeal allowed; all claims struck out/dismissed.
Legal Topics
Declaration of Incompatibility, Divorce Proceedings, Financial Orders on Divorce, Article 6 ECHR (fair Trial), Article 8 ECHR (private/family Life), Article 14 ECHR (discrimination), Judicial Review, Abuse of Process, Collateral Attack, Limitation of Actions
Constitutional Law Family Law Human Rights Law Civil Procedure Declaration of Incompatibility Divorce Proceedings Financial Orders on Divorce Article 6 ECHR (fair Trial) +6 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 6 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Charles Ayeh-Kumi

Claimant/appellant

Lord Chancellor

Defendant/respondent

Secretary of State for Justice

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Order Striking Out Claim, With Cross Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's claims for damages and declarations regarding the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 and family law proceedings are maintainable in private law or amount to an abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether the claim for a declaration of incompatibility under section 4 Human Rights Act 1998 is properly brought and/or has merit
  3. 3 Whether the claims are out of time under section 7(5) Human Rights Act 1998

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant's claims for damages and declarations regarding the conduct of family law proceedings and the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 are abusive, amount to an impermissible collateral attack on judicial decisions, and are out of time. No arguable breach of duty by the defendants is disclosed. The claim for a declaration of incompatibility under section 4 Human Rights Act 1998 is academic, misconceived, and bound to fail as the relevant statutory provisions are not incompatible with the ECHR.

Court Disposition

Claimant's appeal dismissed; Defendants' appeal allowed; all claims struck out/dismissed.

Orders

  • Claimant's appeal is dismissed on the merits and for failure to comply with procedural orders.
  • Defendants' appeal is allowed; the remaining claim for a declaration of incompatibility is struck out/dismissed.