Bank of Scotland v Johnson (Rev 1) [2013] EWCA Civ 982 (19 June 2013)

Bank of Scotland v Johnson (Rev 1) [2013] EWCA Civ 982 (19 June 2013)

The Court of Appeal held that although the Circuit Judge erred in making a positive finding of harassment without a trial, the error did not invalidate the order allowing the appeal and awarding costs, as the substantive issues had become academic once the bank wrote off the debt. The proper order was to allow the appeal against the dismissal, record the writing off of the debt, and award costs, but not to make a finding of proven harassment.

Citation
[2013] EWCA Civ 982
Parties
Appellant/defendant: Bank of Scotland Plc; Respondent/claimant: Mrs Marian Pamela Johnson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 June 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal to Court of Appeal From County Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Harassment, Debt Collection, Costs, Injunctions, Summary Judgment
Civil Procedure Tort Harassment Debt Collection Costs Injunctions Summary Judgment

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bank of Scotland Plc

Appellant/defendant

Mrs Marian Pamela Johnson

Respondent/claimant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal to Court of Appeal From County Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conduct of the bank and its agents amounted to unlawful harassment under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997
  2. 2 Whether the County Court erred in dismissing the claimant's claim without a full hearing
  3. 3 Whether the Circuit Judge erred in finding proven harassment without a trial of the facts

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that although the Circuit Judge erred in making a positive finding of harassment without a trial, the error did not invalidate the order allowing the appeal and awarding costs, as the substantive issues had become academic once the bank wrote off the debt. The proper order was to allow the appeal against the dismissal, record the writing off of the debt, and award costs, but not to make a finding of proven harassment.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Order of HHJ Staite upheld: permission to appeal granted, appeal allowed, bank to pay 50% of claimant's costs of the appeal, debt on account 543/4086 written off