Clutterbuck & Ors v Cleghorn

Clutterbuck & Ors v Cleghorn

The Pont Street and Oriel Claims were struck out as an abuse of process due to an inexcusable failure to comply with the Aldi Stores guidelines and because they constituted an abusive collateral attack on a prior judgment. The Cliveden Claim, although subject to the Aldi Stores guidelines, was sufficiently distinct and did not constitute an abuse of process; therefore, the appeal was allowed in relation to the Cliveden Claim.

Parties
Claimant/appellant: Amanda Stephanie Clutterbuck; Claimant/appellant: Ian Scranton Paton; Defendant/respondent: William Cleghorn (as judicial factor to the estate of Elliot Nichol deceased)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 March 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed in relation to Pont Street and Oriel Claims; appeal allowed in relation to Cliveden Claim; application to adduce further evidence refused.
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Collateral Attack, Case Management, Joint Venture Agreements, Strike Out Applications
Civil Procedure Property Law Abuse of Process Collateral Attack Case Management Joint Venture Agreements Strike Out Applications

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 6 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Amanda Stephanie Clutterbuck

Claimant/appellant

Ian Scranton Paton

Claimant/appellant

William Cleghorn (as judicial factor to the estate of Elliot Nichol deceased)

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants' claims constitute an abuse of process under Henderson v Henderson principles
  2. 2 Whether the Aldi Stores guidelines were engaged and breached
  3. 3 Whether the Pont Street and Oriel Claims amount to an abusive collateral attack on a prior judgment

Ratio Decidendi

The Pont Street and Oriel Claims were struck out as an abuse of process due to an inexcusable failure to comply with the Aldi Stores guidelines and because they constituted an abusive collateral attack on a prior judgment. The Cliveden Claim, although subject to the Aldi Stores guidelines, was sufficiently distinct and did not constitute an abuse of process; therefore, the appeal was allowed in relation to the Cliveden Claim.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed in relation to Pont Street and Oriel Claims; appeal allowed in relation to Cliveden Claim; application to adduce further evidence refused.

Orders

  • Pont Street Claim struck out as abuse of process
  • Oriel Claim struck out as abuse of process