Hope v Carige [2002] EWCA Civ 777 (15 May 2002)

Hope v Carige [2002] EWCA Civ 777 (15 May 2002)

The claim had no real prospect of success because the bonds were lawfully seized by the police under judicial authority, which is a complete defence to the claim for their return or value, regardless of whether they were forgeries. There was no procedural irregularity in admitting the Italian Treasury's certification, as the claimant did not challenge the authenticity of the bonds or the evidence. The application for permission to appeal was refused as the claim was hopeless.

Citation
[2002] EWCA Civ 777
Parties
Claimant/applicant: George S Hope; Defendant/respondent: Banca Carige
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 May 2002
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal (court of Appeal)
Outcome
Permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Strike Out Application, Conversion, Forgery, Procedural Fairness, Article 6 ECHR
Civil Procedure Banking Law Strike Out Application Conversion Forgery Procedural Fairness Article 6 ECHR

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 4 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

George S Hope

Claimant/applicant

Banca Carige

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal (court of Appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim should be struck out for disclosing no reasonable grounds and being an abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether the claimant was denied a fair trial under Article 6 ECHR due to reliance on a foreign judgment in his absence
  3. 3 Whether the bonds in question were forgeries and/or lawfully seized

Ratio Decidendi

The claim had no real prospect of success because the bonds were lawfully seized by the police under judicial authority, which is a complete defence to the claim for their return or value, regardless of whether they were forgeries. There was no procedural irregularity in admitting the Italian Treasury's certification, as the claimant did not challenge the authenticity of the bonds or the evidence. The application for permission to appeal was refused as the claim was hopeless.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • Applications refused with costs summarily assessed at £3,000 exclusive of VAT