Graham v Eltham Conservative & Unionist Club & Ors

Graham v Eltham Conservative & Unionist Club & Ors

All appeals were refused as unarguable and totally without merit because the Club's legal structure precluded liability of individual members and officers absent specific allegations, the Secretary acted under committee direction, costs and unless orders were properly made due to the claimant's conduct, the exclusion of the lay advocate was justified by his disruptive and vexatious behaviour, the judges were not biased, assessors were not required, and the claims were time-barred.

Parties
Claimant/appellant: Andrew James Graham; Defendants/respondents: Eltham Conservative & Unionist Club & Others
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 April 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court Orders; Applications for Permission to Appeal
Outcome
All applications for permission to appeal refused as totally without merit.
Legal Topics
Strike Out Applications, Rights of Audience, Costs Orders, Limitation Periods, Lay Advocacy, Bias Allegations
Civil Procedure Discrimination Law Strike Out Applications Rights of Audience Costs Orders Limitation Periods Lay Advocacy Bias 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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Andrew James Graham

Claimant/appellant

Eltham Conservative & Unionist Club & Others

Defendants/respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court Orders; Applications for Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claims against individual committee members and the police officer could stand in law
  2. 2 Whether the Secretary of the Club could be personally liable
  3. 3 Whether costs orders and unless orders were properly made

Ratio Decidendi

All appeals were refused as unarguable and totally without merit because the Club's legal structure precluded liability of individual members and officers absent specific allegations, the Secretary acted under committee direction, costs and unless orders were properly made due to the claimant's conduct, the exclusion of the lay advocate was justified by his disruptive and vexatious behaviour, the judges were not biased, assessors were not required, and the claims were time-barred.

Court Disposition

All applications for permission to appeal refused as totally without merit.

Orders

  • Appeals marked as totally without merit.
  • Costs orders against the claimant upheld.