CXX v DXX

CXX v DXX

It is not, in principle, an abuse of process for a defendant to challenge his criminal convictions in subsequent civil proceedings. However, in this case, the convictions, together with the supporting evidence and the lack of any real prospect of successfully challenging them, justify summary judgment for the claimant. The inconsistency in the claimant's pleading does not provide a realistic prospect of undermining the convictions or the claim.

Parties
Claimant (respondent): CXX; Defendant (appellant): DXX
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 June 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal and Full Appeal Hearing
Outcome
Permission to appeal refused; summary judgment for the claimant upheld.
Legal Topics
Trespass to the Person, Harassment, Summary Judgment, Abuse of Process, Effect of Criminal Convictions in Civil Proceedings
Tort Law Civil Procedure Trespass to the Person Harassment Summary Judgment Abuse of Process Effect of Criminal Convictions in Civil Proceedings

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

Parties

CXX

Claimant (respondent)

DXX

Defendant (appellant)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal and Full Appeal Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether it is an abuse of process for a defendant to challenge criminal convictions in civil proceedings for the same facts
  2. 2 Whether summary judgment should be granted where the defendant seeks to challenge underlying criminal convictions
  3. 3 The evidential weight of criminal convictions in subsequent civil proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

It is not, in principle, an abuse of process for a defendant to challenge his criminal convictions in subsequent civil proceedings. However, in this case, the convictions, together with the supporting evidence and the lack of any real prospect of successfully challenging them, justify summary judgment for the claimant. The inconsistency in the claimant's pleading does not provide a realistic prospect of undermining the convictions or the claim.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal refused; summary judgment for the claimant upheld.

Orders

  • Relevant paragraphs of the defence remain struck out.
  • Summary judgment for the claimant for damages to be assessed.