Wilkinson v West Coast Capital & Ors [2005] EWHC 1606 (Ch) (22 July 2005)

Wilkinson v West Coast Capital & Ors [2005] EWHC 1606 (Ch) (22 July 2005)

The court declined to strike out the allegedly irrelevant or disproportionate paragraphs in the petitioner's witness statements at the pre-trial stage, finding it was not plain they would never be relevant or helpful. However, the court struck out evidence relating to without prejudice negotiations, holding that the without prejudice rule applied and the petitioner's attempts to circumvent it by limiting the scope of evidence or alleging bad faith were unsupported by the evidence and contrary to established legal principles.

Citation
[2005] EWHC 1606 (Ch)
Parties
Petitioner: Peter Robert Wilkinson; Respondents: West Coast Capital & Ors; Respondents: 2nd and 5th Respondents
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 July 2005
Procedural Posture
Company Law Petition (s.459 Companies Act 1985) / Pre Trial Review
Outcome
Application to strike out parts of witness statements on grounds of irrelevance/disproportionality refused; application to strike out evidence of without prejudice negotiations granted.
Legal Topics
Unfair Prejudice Petition, Striking Out Evidence, Without Prejudice Rule, Disclosure, Expert Evidence, Case Management
Company Law Civil Procedure Unfair Prejudice Petition Striking Out Evidence Without Prejudice Rule Disclosure Expert Evidence Case Management

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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Robert Wilkinson

Petitioner

West Coast Capital & Ors

Respondents

2nd and 5th Respondents

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Company Law Petition (s.459 Companies Act 1985) / Pre Trial Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether parts of the petitioner's witness statements should be struck out for irrelevance or disproportionality
  2. 2 Whether evidence of without prejudice negotiations is admissible

Ratio Decidendi

The court declined to strike out the allegedly irrelevant or disproportionate paragraphs in the petitioner's witness statements at the pre-trial stage, finding it was not plain they would never be relevant or helpful. However, the court struck out evidence relating to without prejudice negotiations, holding that the without prejudice rule applied and the petitioner's attempts to circumvent it by limiting the scope of evidence or alleging bad faith were unsupported by the evidence and contrary to established legal principles.

Court Disposition

Application to strike out parts of witness statements on grounds of irrelevance/disproportionality refused; application to strike out evidence of without prejudice negotiations granted.

Orders

  • Order for disclosure by list of relevant documents within 14 days by petitioner and Mr Wood.
  • Each party to inform the other by 14 October 2005 of intended order of calling witnesses, with 48 hours' notice of any changes before trial.