Bawden v WM Morrison Supermarkets Plc [2015] EWCA Civ 957 (22 July 2015)

Bawden v WM Morrison Supermarkets Plc [2015] EWCA Civ 957 (22 July 2015)

The appellate judge was entitled to interfere with the District Judge's refusal of relief from sanctions because there was a good excuse for the delay in serving the witness statement, and a material change of circumstances justified admitting the surveillance evidence; the rules should not shield fraudulent claims.

Citation
[2015] EWCA Civ 957
Parties
Claimant/applicant: Mrs June Bawden; Defendant/respondent: WM Morrison Supermarkets PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 July 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Renewed Oral Application for Permission to Bring a Second Appeal
Outcome
Application for permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Relief From Sanctions, Admission of Late Evidence, Fraud in Litigation, Case Management Discretion
Civil Procedure Personal Injury Relief From Sanctions Admission of Late Evidence Fraud in Litigation Case Management Discretion

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs June Bawden

Claimant/applicant

WM Morrison Supermarkets PLC

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Renewed Oral Application for Permission to Bring a Second Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge was wrong to interfere with the District Judge's refusal to grant relief from sanctions for late filing of witness statement
  2. 2 Whether the judge was wrong to disturb the District Judge's refusal to admit surveillance evidence
  3. 3 Whether there was a material change of circumstances justifying admission of new evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The appellate judge was entitled to interfere with the District Judge's refusal of relief from sanctions because there was a good excuse for the delay in serving the witness statement, and a material change of circumstances justified admitting the surveillance evidence; the rules should not shield fraudulent claims.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to appeal refused