Cohen v Lorrells LLP & Ors [2019] EWHC 32 (QB) (15 January 2019)

Cohen v Lorrells LLP & Ors [2019] EWHC 32 (QB) (15 January 2019)

The claim for a declaration against the second defendant is struck out because it serves no useful purpose, will not bind the relevant insurer, and constitutes an abuse of process. The claimant is given an opportunity to amend the claim to join the insurer, failing which the claim against the second defendant will be struck out without further order.

Citation
[2019] EWHC 32
Parties
Claimant: Justin Cohen; First Defendant: Lorrells LLP (in liquidation); Second Defendant: Eldons Berkeley Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 January 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Professional Negligence / Insurance / Application to Strike Out Claim for Declaratory Relief Against Second Defendant
Outcome
Claim for declaration against second defendant stayed with liberty to amend; to be struck out if not amended within time specified.
Legal Topics
Successor Practice Rules, Declaratory Relief, Professional Indemnity Insurance, Striking Out Pleadings, Abuse of Process
Insurance Law Civil Procedure Professional Negligence Successor Practice Rules Declaratory Relief Professional Indemnity Insurance Striking Out Pleadings Abuse of Process

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

Parties

Justin Cohen

Claimant

Lorrells LLP (in liquidation)

First Defendant

Eldons Berkeley Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Professional Negligence / Insurance / Application to Strike Out Claim for Declaratory Relief Against Second Defendant

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim for a declaration that the second defendant is a 'successor practice' should be struck out
  2. 2 Whether declaratory relief is appropriate in the absence of a direct cause of action against the second defendant
  3. 3 Whether the proceedings constitute an abuse of process

Ratio Decidendi

The claim for a declaration against the second defendant is struck out because it serves no useful purpose, will not bind the relevant insurer, and constitutes an abuse of process. The claimant is given an opportunity to amend the claim to join the insurer, failing which the claim against the second defendant will be struck out without further order.

Court Disposition

Claim for declaration against second defendant stayed with liberty to amend; to be struck out if not amended within time specified.

Orders

  • Claim against second defendant stayed for a limited period to allow claimant to apply to amend and join insurer.
  • Unless claimant applies to lift stay and amend, claim against second defendant will be struck out without further order.