Hobson & Ors v Ashton Morton Slack Solicitors & Ors

Hobson & Ors v Ashton Morton Slack Solicitors & Ors

The application for a GLO fails because no sufficiently precise group litigation issue was identified, alternative procedures such as test cases or consolidation were available and not properly considered, claims against solicitors lacked justification unless unions were unable to pay, costs were grossly...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Applicants: Alan Thomas Hobson & Ors; Respondent: Ashton Morton Slack Solicitors; Respondent: Moss Solicitors; Respondent: Beresfords Solicitors; Respondent: Wake Smith Solicitors; Respondent: Raleys Solicitors; Respondent: The Union of Democratic Mineworkers (Nottingham Section); Respondent: Vendside Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 May 2006
Procedural Posture
Group Litigation Order Application / Judgment on Application for GLO
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Group Litigation Orders, Enforceability of Union Agreements, Solicitor Negligence, Costs and Insurance
Civil Procedure Contract Law Group Litigation Orders Enforceability of Union Agreements Solicitor Negligence Costs and Insurance

Source-derived case record

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 11
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alan Thomas Hobson & Ors

Applicants

Ashton Morton Slack Solicitors

Respondent

Moss Solicitors

Respondent

Beresfords Solicitors

Respondent

Wake Smith Solicitors

Respondent

Raleys Solicitors

Respondent

The Union of Democratic Mineworkers (Nottingham Section)

Respondent

Vendside Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Group Litigation Order Application / Judgment on Application for GLO

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a Group Litigation Order (GLO) should be granted for claims against solicitors and unions regarding deductions from miners' compensation
  2. 2 Whether agreements between unions and claimants for deductions are enforceable
  3. 3 Whether solicitors breached duty in advising claimants about deductions

Ratio Decidendi

The application for a GLO fails because no sufficiently precise group litigation issue was identified, alternative procedures such as test cases or consolidation were available and not properly considered, claims against solicitors lacked justification unless unions were unable to pay, costs were grossly disproportionate to sums claimed, and the ATE insurance arrangements were uncertain and potentially unenforceable.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application for Group Litigation Order is refused
  • Costs to be determined as appropriate