Sweetman v Nathan & Ors [2003] EWCA Civ 1115 (25 July 2003)

Sweetman v Nathan & Ors [2003] EWCA Civ 1115 (25 July 2003)

The Court of Appeal held that the claimant's action was not automatically barred by the prior finding of fraud (the Dehn Judgment) and that the doctrine of ex turpi causa did not preclude his claim against his solicitor and the solicitor's partners for negligence and breach of trust, provided the claim could be pleaded and proved without reliance on the fraud. The court found that the judge below erred in holding that issue estoppel or abuse of process was fatal to the claim and that the action should not have been struck out solely on those grounds. The appeal was allowed and the claim was permitted to proceed.

Citation
[2003] EWCA Civ 1115
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Sweetman; Defendants/respondents: Nathan & Ors
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 July 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court (queen's Bench Division)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; order striking out the claim set aside.
Legal Topics
Issue Estoppel, Abuse of Process, Ex Turpi Causa, Negligence of Solicitors, Vicarious Liability, Fraud, Res Judicata
Civil Procedure Professional Negligence Partnership Law Issue Estoppel Abuse of Process Ex Turpi Causa Negligence of Solicitors Vicarious Liability +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 5 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sweetman

Claimant/appellant

Nathan & Ors

Defendants/respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court (queen's Bench Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether issue estoppel or abuse of process precludes the claimant from pursuing claims against the defendants based on findings in prior proceedings (the Dehn Judgment)
  2. 2 Whether the claimant's action is barred by the doctrine of ex turpi causa due to his own fraud
  3. 3 Whether the claimant can recover damages for alleged negligence and breach of trust by his solicitor and the solicitor's partners despite findings of fraud in earlier proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that the claimant's action was not automatically barred by the prior finding of fraud (the Dehn Judgment) and that the doctrine of ex turpi causa did not preclude his claim against his solicitor and the solicitor's partners for negligence and breach of trust, provided the claim could be pleaded and proved without reliance on the fraud. The court found that the judge below erred in holding that issue estoppel or abuse of process was fatal to the claim and that the action should not have been struck out solely on those grounds. The appeal was allowed and the claim was permitted to proceed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; order striking out the claim set aside.

Orders

  • The claim is reinstated and permitted to proceed to trial.
  • Costs of the appeal to be determined.