Miller (t/a Waterloo Plant) v Cawley [2002] EWCA Civ 1100 (30 July 2002)

Miller (t/a Waterloo Plant) v Cawley [2002] EWCA Civ 1100 (30 July 2002)

The judge erred by applying the 'reasonable prospect of success' test after the defendant elected not to call evidence; the correct test was whether the claimant proved his case on the balance of probabilities. The judgment entered against the defendant cannot stand and must be remitted for determination under the proper test.

Citation
[2002] EWCA Civ 1100
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Michael John Miller (t/a Waterloo Plant); Defendant/appellant: Margaret Cawley
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 July 2002
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Preliminary Issue Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment against defendant set aside; case remitted for reconsideration applying the correct test.
Legal Topics
Submission of No Case to Answer, Balance of Probabilities, Election to Call Evidence, Contract Formation
Civil Procedure Contract Law Submission of No Case to Answer Balance of Probabilities Election to Call Evidence Contract Formation

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 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michael John Miller (t/a Waterloo Plant)

Claimant/respondent

Margaret Cawley

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Preliminary Issue Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge applied the correct test after defendant's election to call no evidence
  2. 2 Whether the claimant established a contract with the defendant on the balance of probabilities

Ratio Decidendi

The judge erred by applying the 'reasonable prospect of success' test after the defendant elected not to call evidence; the correct test was whether the claimant proved his case on the balance of probabilities. The judgment entered against the defendant cannot stand and must be remitted for determination under the proper test.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment against defendant set aside; case remitted for reconsideration applying the correct test.

Orders

  • Case remitted to HHJ Moseley for determination on balance of probabilities based on existing evidence and election.
  • Costs below for determination by the judge after reconsideration.