Clarke v Barclays Bank Plc & Anor

Clarke v Barclays Bank Plc & Anor

The claimant's withholding of information about the withdrawal of his original expert constituted a serious abuse of process, causing prejudice to the defendants and undermining procedural discipline. The balance of justice required refusal of permission to rely on the new expert report, and the Deputy Master's contrary decision was a fundamental error of principle and law.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Steven Gerald Clarke; Defendant/appellant: Barclays Bank PLC; Third Party/appellant: Lamberts Surveyors Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 February 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Interlocutory Order
Outcome
Appeal allowed; claimant's application for permission to rely on new expert evidence dismissed.
Legal Topics
Expert Evidence, Abuse of Process, Relief From Sanctions, Case Management, Disclosure Obligations
Civil Procedure Property Law Expert Evidence Abuse of Process Relief From Sanctions Case Management Disclosure Obligations

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 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Steven Gerald Clarke

Claimant/respondent

Barclays Bank PLC

Defendant/appellant

Lamberts Surveyors Limited

Third Party/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Interlocutory Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant should be permitted to rely on a new expert report after withholding information about the withdrawal of the original expert
  2. 2 Whether the claimant's conduct constituted abuse of process
  3. 3 Whether relief from sanctions or extension of time should be granted for late expert evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant's withholding of information about the withdrawal of his original expert constituted a serious abuse of process, causing prejudice to the defendants and undermining procedural discipline. The balance of justice required refusal of permission to rely on the new expert report, and the Deputy Master's contrary decision was a fundamental error of principle and law.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; claimant's application for permission to rely on new expert evidence dismissed.

Orders

  • Claimant may rely on the original expert report (Dall report) at trial, subject to the trial judge's discretion on weight.
  • Directions for exchange of witness statements to be agreed by parties before trial.