Das & Anor v Barclays Bank Plc [2006] EWHC 817 (QB) (11 April 2006)

Das & Anor v Barclays Bank Plc [2006] EWHC 817 (QB) (11 April 2006)

The second proceedings are an abuse of process as they attempt to relitigate issues already determined in the first proceedings, are time-barred, and disclose no real prospect of success. No conflict of interest was established to prevent the Defendant's solicitors from acting.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2006] EWHC 817
Parties
First Claimant: Mrs Dipa Das; Second Claimant: Mr Sachindra Nath Das; Defendant: Barclays Bank PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 April 2006
Procedural Posture
Civil / Application for Strike Out and Summary Judgment
Outcome
Claim struck out and summary judgment for Defendant
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Limitation Periods, Conflict of Interest, Summary Judgment, Strike Out Applications
Civil Procedure Banking Law Abuse of Process Limitation Periods Conflict of Interest Summary Judgment Strike Out Applications

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs Dipa Das

First Claimant

Mr Sachindra Nath Das

Second Claimant

Barclays Bank PLC

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Application for Strike Out and Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the second proceedings constitute an abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether the second proceedings are time-barred under the limitation period
  3. 3 Whether there is a conflict of interest preventing the Defendant's solicitors from acting

Ratio Decidendi

The second proceedings are an abuse of process as they attempt to relitigate issues already determined in the first proceedings, are time-barred, and disclose no real prospect of success. No conflict of interest was established to prevent the Defendant's solicitors from acting.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out and summary judgment for Defendant

Orders

  • Proceedings struck out under Rule 3.4(2)(b) CPR
  • Summary judgment granted under Part 24 CPR