Wahid & Anor v Skanska UK Plc & Anor [2014] EWHC 251 (QB) (11 February 2014)

Wahid & Anor v Skanska UK Plc & Anor [2014] EWHC 251 (QB) (11 February 2014)

The claimant failed to comply with the unless order by not providing an accurate medical mandate and not properly disclosing or explaining the absence of the 2005 medical report. The application before the lower court did not properly challenge the automatic strike out or seek relief from sanctions. There was no serious procedural irregularity or misstatement of facts by the defendants. The appeal was therefore dismissed.

Citation
[2014] EWHC 251
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Mr Sayed Asadullah Abdul Wahid; Claimant/appellant: Mr Lutfullah Shadkam; Defendant/respondent: Skanska UK PLC; Defendant/respondent: Riverstone Insurance
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 February 2014
Procedural Posture
Appeal / High Court Appeal From County Court Judgment Refusing to Set Aside Strike Out And/or Grant Relief From Sanctions
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Relief From Sanctions, Strike Out of Statements of Case, Disclosure Obligations, Unless Orders, Appeals Procedure
Civil Procedure Personal Injury Relief From Sanctions Strike Out of Statements of Case Disclosure Obligations Unless Orders Appeals Procedure

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Sayed Asadullah Abdul Wahid

Claimant/appellant

Mr Lutfullah Shadkam

Claimant/appellant

Skanska UK PLC

Defendant/respondent

Riverstone Insurance

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / High Court Appeal From County Court Judgment Refusing to Set Aside Strike Out And/or Grant Relief From Sanctions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant had complied with disclosure and mandate requirements under a previous court order
  2. 2 Whether the automatic strike out of the claim was validly triggered
  3. 3 Whether there was a serious procedural irregularity justifying setting aside the strike out

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to comply with the unless order by not providing an accurate medical mandate and not properly disclosing or explaining the absence of the 2005 medical report. The application before the lower court did not properly challenge the automatic strike out or seek relief from sanctions. There was no serious procedural irregularity or misstatement of facts by the defendants. The appeal was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal of Mr Wahid from the Order and judgment of HHJ Gerald of 17 May 2013 is dismissed.