Gladman Commercial Properties v Fisher Hargreaves Proctor & Ors [2013] EWHC 209 (Ch) (13 February 2013)

Gladman Commercial Properties v Fisher Hargreaves Proctor & Ors [2013] EWHC 209 (Ch) (13 February 2013)

The Further Particulars do not disclose a coherent case that the alleged misrepresentations caused GCP to lose the claimed sums; the defect in pleading causation and loss is not cured, and the Particulars of Claim must be struck out.

Citation
[2013] EWHC 209 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Gladman Commercial Properties; First Defendant: Fisher Hargreaves Proctor; Second Defendant: HEB Chartered Surveyors; Third Defendant: David Hargreaves; Fourth Defendant: Jonathan Paul Thomas Bishop
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 February 2013
Procedural Posture
Commercial Property Dispute / Post Judgment Hearing on Amendment and Strike Out
Outcome
Particulars of Claim struck out
Legal Topics
Pleading Requirements, Causation, Remoteness of Damages, Abuse of Process
Commercial Law Civil Procedure Pleading Requirements Causation Remoteness of Damages Abuse of Process

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gladman Commercial Properties

Claimant

Fisher Hargreaves Proctor

First Defendant

HEB Chartered Surveyors

Second Defendant

David Hargreaves

Third Defendant

Jonathan Paul Thomas Bishop

Fourth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Property Dispute / Post Judgment Hearing on Amendment and Strike Out

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Further Particulars cure the defect in pleading causation and loss
  2. 2 Whether the amendment discloses a coherent case with a real prospect of success
  3. 3 Whether inconsistencies in evidence render the claim unsustainable

Ratio Decidendi

The Further Particulars do not disclose a coherent case that the alleged misrepresentations caused GCP to lose the claimed sums; the defect in pleading causation and loss is not cured, and the Particulars of Claim must be struck out.

Court Disposition

Particulars of Claim struck out

Orders

  • Particulars of Claim struck out pursuant to CPR r. 3.4(2)(a)
  • No permission to amend granted