Greencastle MM LLP v Payne & Ors [2022] EWHC 438 (IPEC) (13 January 2022)

Greencastle MM LLP v Payne & Ors [2022] EWHC 438 (IPEC) (13 January 2022)

The witness statements of Mr Quinlan, with limited exceptions, failed to comply with Practice Direction 57AC by including inadmissible opinion, argument, and commentary. The appropriate remedy is to withdraw permission for the existing statements and permit the Claimant to serve a replacement, compliant statement by a set deadline.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 438 (IPEC)
Parties
Claimant: Greencastle MM LLP; Defendant: Alexander Payne; Defendant: Michael Tindall; Defendant: James Haskell
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 January 2022
Procedural Posture
Intellectual Property (passing Off) / Pre Trial Review; Applications to Strike Out Witness Evidence
Outcome
Permission for Mr Quinlan's existing witness statements withdrawn; permission granted to serve a replacement compliant statement by 19 January 2022.
Legal Topics
Practice Direction 57 AC, Witness Evidence, Passing Off, Admissibility of Evidence
Civil Procedure Intellectual Property Practice Direction 57 AC Witness Evidence Passing Off Admissibility of Evidence

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Greencastle MM LLP

Claimant

Alexander Payne

Defendant

Michael Tindall

Defendant

James Haskell

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Intellectual Property (passing Off) / Pre Trial Review; Applications to Strike Out Witness Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether passages of the Claimant's witness statements should be struck out for non-compliance with Practice Direction 57AC
  2. 2 Whether the witness statements contain inadmissible opinion, argument, or commentary on documents

Ratio Decidendi

The witness statements of Mr Quinlan, with limited exceptions, failed to comply with Practice Direction 57AC by including inadmissible opinion, argument, and commentary. The appropriate remedy is to withdraw permission for the existing statements and permit the Claimant to serve a replacement, compliant statement by a set deadline.

Court Disposition

Permission for Mr Quinlan's existing witness statements withdrawn; permission granted to serve a replacement compliant statement by 19 January 2022.

Orders

  • Claimant to serve a replacement, fully compliant witness statement by 19 January 2022.
  • Existing witness statements of Mr Quinlan withdrawn.