Faryab v Philip Ross & Company [2001] EWCA Civ 1418 (7 August 2001)

Faryab v Philip Ross & Company [2001] EWCA Civ 1418 (7 August 2001)

Appeal allowed only to the extent of permitting the breach of duty claim against Philip Ross to proceed; all other amendments and joinder of legal representatives refused as abuse of process and collateral attack. Chancery action struck out as abuse of process; restraining orders against Mr Faryab upheld.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 1418
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Farhad Faryab; Defendant/respondent: Philip Ross and Company (A Firm); Defendant/respondent: Naz Smyth; Defendant/respondent: Mark Golinsky; Defendant/respondent: Michael John Sookias
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 August 2001
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; applications for permission to appeal refused; restraining orders upheld.
Legal Topics
Strike Out Applications, Witness Immunity, Collateral Attack, Declaratory Relief, Costs Orders, Restraining Orders, Assignment of Cause of Action
Civil Procedure Professional Negligence Bankruptcy Abuse of Process Strike Out Applications Witness Immunity Collateral Attack Declaratory Relief +3 more

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Farhad Faryab

Claimant/appellant

Philip Ross and Company (A Firm)

Defendant/respondent

Naz Smyth

Defendant/respondent

Mark Golinsky

Defendant/respondent

Michael John Sookias

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim against Philip Ross for breach of duty as solicitors should be allowed to proceed
  2. 2 Whether Mr Faryab can amend his statement of claim beyond the single ground permitted
  3. 3 Whether legal representatives can be joined as defendants

Ratio Decidendi

Appeal allowed only to the extent of permitting the breach of duty claim against Philip Ross to proceed; all other amendments and joinder of legal representatives refused as abuse of process and collateral attack. Chancery action struck out as abuse of process; restraining orders against Mr Faryab upheld.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; applications for permission to appeal refused; restraining orders upheld.

Orders

  • Permission granted to reamend statement of claim limited to breach of duty allegations (excluding paragraphs 22, 23, 29, 30, 32, 33)
  • Application to join legal representatives as defendants refused