Alexander Gerko v Jonathan Seal & Ors.

Alexander Gerko v Jonathan Seal & Ors.

The particulars of claim failed to provide a cogent and particularised basis for a claim of unlawful means conspiracy based on deceit. The pleadings lacked essential particulars of core allegations, did not set out primary facts to support the fraud and conspiracy claims, and were neither fair to the Defendants nor helpful to the court. The claim did not have a real prospect of success and must be struck out. The amendment application was also dismissed for lack of particulars and substance.

Parties
Claimant: Alexander Gerko; First Defendant: Jonathan Seal; Second Defendant: Robert Taylor; Third Defendant: Elsworthy SJW Limited; Fourth Defendant: Sunley Estates Limited; Fifth Defendant: RPS Consulting Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 January 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil / Ruling on Amendment and Strike Out Applications
Outcome
Claim struck out; amendment application dismissed
Legal Topics
Pleading Fraud, Unlawful Means Conspiracy, Summary Judgment, Strike Out Applications, Particulars of Claim, Causation in Deceit
Civil Procedure Tort Pleading Fraud Unlawful Means Conspiracy Summary Judgment Strike Out Applications Particulars of Claim Causation in Deceit

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alexander Gerko

Claimant

Jonathan Seal

First Defendant

Robert Taylor

Second Defendant

Elsworthy SJW Limited

Third Defendant

Sunley Estates Limited

Fourth Defendant

RPS Consulting Limited

Fifth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Ruling on Amendment and Strike Out Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the particulars of claim adequately plead a case of unlawful means conspiracy based on deceit
  2. 2 Whether the claim should be struck out for lack of particularity and cogency
  3. 3 Whether the amendment application should be allowed

Ratio Decidendi

The particulars of claim failed to provide a cogent and particularised basis for a claim of unlawful means conspiracy based on deceit. The pleadings lacked essential particulars of core allegations, did not set out primary facts to support the fraud and conspiracy claims, and were neither fair to the Defendants nor helpful to the court. The claim did not have a real prospect of success and must be struck out. The amendment application was also dismissed for lack of particulars and substance.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out; amendment application dismissed

Orders

  • The particulars of claim are struck out in their entirety.
  • The amendment application is dismissed.