Samantha Danyelle Clarke v Matthew Poole & Ors

Samantha Danyelle Clarke v Matthew Poole & Ors

Permission to reopen the refusal of permission to appeal was granted because the judge refusing permission failed to address a crucial argument regarding the impact on the claimant’s personal autonomy and mental health from the pressure to undergo testing, which was explicitly raised in the skeleton argument. This omission undermined the integrity of the process and justified reopening the decision. Permission to appeal was granted on all grounds, including the need for authoritative clarification of the correct legal test for stays pending medical testing.

Parties
Claimant/applicant: Samantha Danyelle Clarke; Defendant/respondent: Matthew Poole; Defendant/respondent: Andrej Borisenkov; Defendant/respondent: Great Lakes Insurance SE
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 November 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application to Reopen Refusal of Permission to Appeal; Permission to Appeal Granted
Outcome
Permission to reopen refusal of permission to appeal granted; permission to appeal granted on all grounds.
Legal Topics
Stay of Proceedings, Medical Testing in Litigation, Personal Autonomy, Bodily Integrity, Permission to Appeal, Reopening Final Decisions
Civil Procedure Personal Injury Stay of Proceedings Medical Testing in Litigation Personal Autonomy Bodily Integrity Permission to Appeal Reopening Final Decisions

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Samantha Danyelle Clarke

Claimant/applicant

Matthew Poole

Defendant/respondent

Andrej Borisenkov

Defendant/respondent

Great Lakes Insurance SE

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application to Reopen Refusal of Permission to Appeal; Permission to Appeal Granted

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the refusal of permission to appeal should be reopened under CPR 52.30
  2. 2 Whether the correct legal test for ordering a stay pending medical testing is a two-stage or three-stage test
  3. 3 Whether the claimant's right to personal autonomy and mental health was properly considered

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to reopen the refusal of permission to appeal was granted because the judge refusing permission failed to address a crucial argument regarding the impact on the claimant’s personal autonomy and mental health from the pressure to undergo testing, which was explicitly raised in the skeleton argument. This omission undermined the integrity of the process and justified reopening the decision. Permission to appeal was granted on all grounds, including the need for authoritative clarification of the correct legal test for stays pending medical testing.

Court Disposition

Permission to reopen refusal of permission to appeal granted; permission to appeal granted on all grounds.

Orders

  • Permission to reopen the application for permission to appeal is granted.
  • Permission to appeal is granted on all grounds.