Miller v Garton Shires (a firm)

Miller v Garton Shires (a firm)

The application for permission to appeal is refused because the case does not raise any important point of principle or practice, nor is there any other compelling reason for a second appeal. The lower courts correctly applied the principles of summary judgment and were entitled to conclude, on the evidence, that the claimant's underlying claim was so weak as to be worthless, and thus his professional negligence claim had no real prospect of success.

Parties
Applicant/claimant: David Edward Miller; First Respondent/defendant: Garton Shires (a firm formerly known as Gartons); Second Respondent/defendant: Ison Harrison (a firm)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 October 2006
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Bring a Second Appeal (court of Appeal)
Outcome
Permission to appeal refused; application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Loss of Chance, Second Appeals, Professional Negligence by Solicitors
Civil Procedure Professional Negligence Summary Judgment Loss of Chance Second Appeals Professional Negligence by Solicitors

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 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Edward Miller

Applicant/claimant

Garton Shires (a firm formerly known as Gartons)

First Respondent/defendant

Ison Harrison (a firm)

Second Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Bring a Second Appeal (court of Appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's application for permission to bring a second appeal meets the requirements of CPR 52.13(2)
  2. 2 Whether the summary judgment dismissing the claimant's professional negligence claim was properly granted under CPR 24.2
  3. 3 Whether the lower courts erred in assessing the evidence without a trial

Ratio Decidendi

The application for permission to appeal is refused because the case does not raise any important point of principle or practice, nor is there any other compelling reason for a second appeal. The lower courts correctly applied the principles of summary judgment and were entitled to conclude, on the evidence, that the claimant's underlying claim was so weak as to be worthless, and thus his professional negligence claim had no real prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal refused; application dismissed.