Mark Wolfe & Anor v HSBC UK Bank Plc

Mark Wolfe & Anor v HSBC UK Bank Plc

The Judge was entitled to conclude that the facts known in 2013 were sufficient to plead fraud, so the limitation period started then. No mistake in interpreting the 31 July 2013 letter would have affected this conclusion. The claims are statute-barred and the Judge was right not to re-open his judgment under the AIC jurisdiction.

Parties
Claimant/appellant: Mark Wolfe James; Claimant/appellant: Sian Caroline James; Defendant/respondent: HSBC UK Bank PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 February 2026
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment Striking Out Claim
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Fraud, Deceit, Constructive Trust, Limitation of Actions, Restitution, Breach of Contract
Banking Law Contract Law Tort Law Trusts Law Fraud Deceit Constructive Trust Limitation of Actions +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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mark Wolfe James

Claimant/appellant

Sian Caroline James

Claimant/appellant

HSBC UK Bank PLC

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment Striking Out Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Judge erred in not amending the first judgment under the AIC jurisdiction
  2. 2 Whether the limitation period was properly determined under section 32 of the Limitation Act 1980
  3. 3 Whether the pleaded claims in fraud, deceit, constructive trust, and restitution were sufficiently particularised and arguable

Ratio Decidendi

The Judge was entitled to conclude that the facts known in 2013 were sufficient to plead fraud, so the limitation period started then. No mistake in interpreting the 31 July 2013 letter would have affected this conclusion. The claims are statute-barred and the Judge was right not to re-open his judgment under the AIC jurisdiction.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Claim struck out in its entirety
  • Application to amend Particulars of Claim dismissed