Benjamin Kofi Ackah Brem v Dominic Iver Clark & Anor

Benjamin Kofi Ackah Brem v Dominic Iver Clark & Anor

The lower court's refusal to adjourn and decision to strike out the claim were within its case management discretion. The pleadings were incoherent, failed to properly plead loss, and continued to allege fraud contrary to prior withdrawal. The claimant was given ample opportunity to amend and present his case. Even if the judge should have taken greater care to explain the issues and invite submissions, this would not have changed the outcome given the state of the case. The appeal is dismissed.

Parties
Appellant/claimant: Benjamin Kofi Ackah Brem; First Respondent/first Defendant: Dominic Iver Clark; Second Respondent/second Defendant: Rudd Solicitors
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Strike Out and Costs Order
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Strike Out Applications, Summary Judgment, Adjournment of Hearings, Costs on Indemnity Basis, Pleading Requirements, Valuation of Property, Solicitor Negligence
Civil Procedure Property Law Professional Negligence Strike Out Applications Summary Judgment Adjournment of Hearings Costs on Indemnity Basis Pleading Requirements +2 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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Benjamin Kofi Ackah Brem

Appellant/claimant

Dominic Iver Clark

First Respondent/first Defendant

Rudd Solicitors

Second Respondent/second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Strike Out and Costs Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the lower court erred in refusing an adjournment due to counsel's illness
  2. 2 Whether the lower court erred in striking out the claim against both defendants
  3. 3 Whether the lower court erred in awarding indemnity costs

Ratio Decidendi

The lower court's refusal to adjourn and decision to strike out the claim were within its case management discretion. The pleadings were incoherent, failed to properly plead loss, and continued to allege fraud contrary to prior withdrawal. The claimant was given ample opportunity to amend and present his case. Even if the judge should have taken greater care to explain the issues and invite submissions, this would not have changed the outcome given the state of the case. The appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Costs order against the appellant stands