Lee Castleton v Post Office Ltd & Anor

Lee Castleton v Post Office Ltd & Anor

Given the clear legal and factual distinction between the Part A claims and the more complex Part B and C claims, and the potential for the Part A issues to be dispositive, a split trial is justified to promote efficiency, reduce costs, and manage the case proportionately under the overriding objective.

Parties
Claimant: Lee Castleton; First Defendant: Post Office Ltd; Second Defendant: Fujitsu Services Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 January 2026
Procedural Posture
Civil / Post Directions Hearing, Order for Split Trial of Part a Claims Before Part B and C
Outcome
Order for split trial: Part A claims to be tried separately and in advance of Part B and C claims.
Legal Topics
Split Trial, Settlement Agreement Construction, Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Unconscionability, Rescission of Contract
Civil Procedure Contract Law Fraud Split Trial Settlement Agreement Construction Fraudulent Misrepresentation Unconscionability Rescission of Contract

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 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lee Castleton

Claimant

Post Office Ltd

First Defendant

Fujitsu Services Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Post Directions Hearing, Order for Split Trial of Part a Claims Before Part B and C

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Settlement Deed releases the claims in Part B and Part C against POL and Fujitsu
  2. 2 Whether POL is precluded from relying on the Settlement Deed by reason of unconscionability or fraud
  3. 3 Whether POL fraudulently misrepresented reasons for not calling Gareth Jenkins as a witness

Ratio Decidendi

Given the clear legal and factual distinction between the Part A claims and the more complex Part B and C claims, and the potential for the Part A issues to be dispositive, a split trial is justified to promote efficiency, reduce costs, and manage the case proportionately under the overriding objective.

Court Disposition

Order for split trial: Part A claims to be tried separately and in advance of Part B and C claims.

Orders

  • Separate trial of Part A claims before trial of Part B and C claims
  • First case management conference for Part A claims to be held before end of July