889 Trading Limited v Clydesdale Bank Plc & Ors [2021] EWHC 850 (Ch) (09 April 2021)

889 Trading Limited v Clydesdale Bank Plc & Ors [2021] EWHC 850 (Ch) (09 April 2021)

The present proceedings are an abuse of process as they duplicate claims previously struck out for deliberate non-compliance with an unless order, and the Particulars of Claim do not disclose reasonable grounds for claims against the Second to Fifth Defendants or for new claims against the Bank.

Citation
[2021] EWHC 850 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: 889 Trading Limited; First Defendant: Clydesdale Bank PLC; Second Defendant: Peter Charles Kelly; Third Defendant: David Joseph Duffy; Fourth Defendant: Gavin Rodney Opperman; Fifth Defendant: David Jonathan Bennett
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 April 2021
Procedural Posture
Strike Out Application and Disclosure Application / Judgment on Preliminary Applications
Outcome
Claim struck out
Legal Topics
Strike Out for Abuse of Process, Disclosure, Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Breach of Duty, Rescission of Contracts
Civil Procedure Banking Law Fraud Strike Out for Abuse of Process Disclosure Fraudulent Misrepresentation Breach of Duty Rescission of Contracts

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

889 Trading Limited

Claimant

Clydesdale Bank PLC

First Defendant

Peter Charles Kelly

Second Defendant

David Joseph Duffy

Third Defendant

Gavin Rodney Opperman

Fourth Defendant

David Jonathan Bennett

Fifth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Strike Out Application and Disclosure Application / Judgment on Preliminary Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the present proceedings are an abuse of process due to duplication of claims previously struck out
  2. 2 Whether the Particulars of Claim disclose reasonable grounds for bringing claims against the Defendants
  3. 3 Whether the Claimant is entitled to disclosure of documents under CPR Part 31 and Bankers Books Evidence Act 1879

Ratio Decidendi

The present proceedings are an abuse of process as they duplicate claims previously struck out for deliberate non-compliance with an unless order, and the Particulars of Claim do not disclose reasonable grounds for claims against the Second to Fifth Defendants or for new claims against the Bank.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out

Orders

  • Claim Form and Particulars of Claim struck out against all Defendants
  • No relief granted to Claimant