Frost & Anor v Giddens [2025] EWHC 3325 (Comm) (19 December 2025)

Frost & Anor v Giddens [2025] EWHC 3325 (Comm) (19 December 2025)

The claim to set aside the earlier judgment for fraud is an abuse of process because the issues of alleged fraudulent evidence and the deletion of emails were raised, litigated, and determined in the earlier proceedings. The claimants had the opportunity to adduce expert evidence at that time but failed to do so. The present claim is an attempt to relitigate matters already decided, and there are no special circumstances justifying departure from the finality principle. The action is therefore struck out as an abuse of process.

Citation
[2025] EWHC 3325 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Brian Frost; Claimant/respondent: The Frost Partnership; Defendant/applicant: Deborah Giddens
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 December 2025
Procedural Posture
Application to Strike Out Claim / Judgment on Strike Out Application
Outcome
Claim struck out as an abuse of process
Legal Topics
Setting Aside Judgments for Fraud, Abuse of Process, Res Judicata, Limitation Periods, Finality of Litigation
Civil Procedure Fraud Abuse of Process Setting Aside Judgments for Fraud Res Judicata Limitation Periods Finality of Litigation

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

Parties

Brian Frost

Claimant/respondent

The Frost Partnership

Claimant/respondent

Deborah Giddens

Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Application to Strike Out Claim / Judgment on Strike Out Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim to set aside a previous judgment for fraud is an abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether the issues raised in the new claim were or should have been raised in earlier proceedings
  3. 3 Whether the claimants are precluded from bringing a fresh action by principles of res judicata or abuse of process

Ratio Decidendi

The claim to set aside the earlier judgment for fraud is an abuse of process because the issues of alleged fraudulent evidence and the deletion of emails were raised, litigated, and determined in the earlier proceedings. The claimants had the opportunity to adduce expert evidence at that time but failed to do so. The present claim is an attempt to relitigate matters already decided, and there are no special circumstances justifying departure from the finality principle. The action is therefore struck out as an abuse of process.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out as an abuse of process

Orders

  • The claim is struck out under CPR 3.4(2)(b) as an abuse of process.
  • No permission to amend or reissue the claim on the same grounds.