Shaw v Medtronic Corevalve LLC & Ors [2017] EWHC 54 (QB) (20 January 2017)

Shaw v Medtronic Corevalve LLC & Ors [2017] EWHC 54 (QB) (20 January 2017)

The claims against the First, Third, and Fourth Defendants are struck out or set aside because they disclose no reasonable grounds or have no real prospect of success, being barred by the Jameson principle or by statutory and common law bars to exemplary, aggravated, and restitutionary damages, and there is no viable cause of action in unjust enrichment.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 54 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Gabriele Shaw (suing as the personal representative of the estate of William Ewan (deceased)); First Defendant: Medtronic Corevalve LLC; Second Defendant: Jean Claude Laborde; Third Defendant: Medtronic Inc; Fourth Defendant: Medtronic Limited; Fifth Defendant: Medtronic PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 January 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Product Liability / Negligence / Restitution / Interlocutory Applications: Strike Out, Summary Judgment, and Setting Aside Service Out of Jurisdiction
Outcome
Claims against the First, Third, and Fourth Defendants struck out or set aside; service out of jurisdiction set aside; no further proceedings against these Defendants.
Legal Topics
Negligence, Consumer Protection Act 1987, Unjust Enrichment, Restitution, Exemplary Damages, Aggravated Damages, Jurisdiction, Strike Out, Summary Judgment
Tort Law Product Liability Civil Procedure Negligence Consumer Protection Act 1987 Unjust Enrichment Restitution Exemplary Damages +4 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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gabriele Shaw (suing as the personal representative of the estate of William Ewan (deceased))

Claimant

Medtronic Corevalve LLC

First Defendant

Jean Claude Laborde

Second Defendant

Medtronic Inc

Third Defendant

Medtronic Limited

Fourth Defendant

Medtronic PLC

Fifth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Product Liability / Negligence / Restitution / Interlocutory Applications: Strike Out, Summary Judgment, and Setting Aside Service Out of Jurisdiction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claims against the First, Third, and Fourth Defendants disclose a reasonable cause of action or have a real prospect of success
  2. 2 Whether the Claimant is barred from pursuing further claims by the principle that a satisfied judgment is a bar to further claims for the same damage (Jameson principle)
  3. 3 Whether claims for exemplary, aggravated, or restitutionary damages, or for unjust enrichment, are legally sustainable in this context

Ratio Decidendi

The claims against the First, Third, and Fourth Defendants are struck out or set aside because they disclose no reasonable grounds or have no real prospect of success, being barred by the Jameson principle or by statutory and common law bars to exemplary, aggravated, and restitutionary damages, and there is no viable cause of action in unjust enrichment.

Court Disposition

Claims against the First, Third, and Fourth Defendants struck out or set aside; service out of jurisdiction set aside; no further proceedings against these Defendants.

Orders

  • Set aside Master McCloud's order as it relates to the First and Third Defendants.
  • Set aside service of the Claim Form on the First and Third Defendants out of the jurisdiction.