JO1 v Garret & Anor

JO1 v Garret & Anor

The application for permission to appeal was refused because the pleadings failed to address the essential elements of the alleged torts, the allegations were speculative, causation was not properly pleaded, and the claim in malicious falsehood was statute barred. There was no real prospect of success in any appeal.

Parties
Claimant/appellant: JO1; First Defendant/respondent: Christopher Garret; Second Defendant/respondent: Oxfordshire County Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 March 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal From Summary Judgment
Outcome
Permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Misfeasance in Public Office, Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Malicious Falsehood, Summary Judgment, Causation, Limitation of Actions

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

JO1

Claimant/appellant

Christopher Garret

First Defendant/respondent

Oxfordshire County Council

Second Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal From Summary Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the claim discloses a reasonable cause of action in misfeasance in public office, deceit, or malicious falsehood
  2. 2 Whether the claim is statute barred
  3. 3 Whether the claim is an abuse of process

Ratio Decidendi

The application for permission to appeal was refused because the pleadings failed to address the essential elements of the alleged torts, the allegations were speculative, causation was not properly pleaded, and the claim in malicious falsehood was statute barred. There was no real prospect of success in any appeal.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • Application for permission to appeal is refused