MICHAEL WILSON & PARTNERS, LIMITED v JOHN FORSTER EMMOTT & Ors

MICHAEL WILSON & PARTNERS, LIMITED v JOHN FORSTER EMMOTT & Ors

The claim against the 2nd to 6th defendants is struck out and/or summary judgment entered because the particulars of claim do not disclose any reasonable cause of action, no proper claim in unjust enrichment or deceit is pleaded, and the factual basis for the claim is fanciful. No direct payment or proprietary interest is established, and the pleadings fail to meet the required standard for fraud or negligence. The 6th defendant is entitled to summary judgment as there is no evidence of any involvement or receipt of funds.

Parties
Claimant: Michael Wilson & Partners, Limited; 1st Defendant: John Forster Emmott; 2nd Defendant: M. B. Robinson for the Estate of Michael Lyndon Beverly Robinson (Deceased); 3rd Defendant: MR Law Limited; 4th Defendant: Kerman & Co LLP; 5th Defendant: Phillip Alexander Shepherd QC; 6th Defendant: Shepherd Legal Limited; 7th Defendant: Sokol Holdings Inc
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 July 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Commercial / Application for Strike Out And/or Summary Judgment
Outcome
Claim struck out and/or summary judgment entered for the 2nd to 6th defendants
Legal Topics
Strike Out Applications, Summary Judgment, Unjust Enrichment, Costs Orders, Fraud Allegations
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Strike Out Applications Summary Judgment Unjust Enrichment Costs Orders Fraud Allegations

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

Parties

Michael Wilson & Partners, Limited

Claimant

John Forster Emmott

1st Defendant

M. B. Robinson for the Estate of Michael Lyndon Beverly Robinson (Deceased)

2nd Defendant

MR Law Limited

3rd Defendant

Kerman & Co LLP

4th Defendant

Phillip Alexander Shepherd QC

5th Defendant

Shepherd Legal Limited

6th Defendant

Sokol Holdings Inc

7th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Commercial / Application for Strike Out And/or Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim discloses any reasonable grounds against the 2nd to 6th defendants
  2. 2 Whether the claim is an abuse of process
  3. 3 Whether the claimant has a realistic prospect of success on the facts

Ratio Decidendi

The claim against the 2nd to 6th defendants is struck out and/or summary judgment entered because the particulars of claim do not disclose any reasonable cause of action, no proper claim in unjust enrichment or deceit is pleaded, and the factual basis for the claim is fanciful. No direct payment or proprietary interest is established, and the pleadings fail to meet the required standard for fraud or negligence. The 6th defendant is entitled to summary judgment as there is no evidence of any involvement or receipt of funds.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out and/or summary judgment entered for the 2nd to 6th defendants

Orders

  • The claim against the 2nd to 6th defendants is struck out under CPR r.3.4(2)(a) and/or summary judgment is entered for them.
  • The court will hear further argument on the form of order, certification as totally without merit, and civil restraint orders after hand down.