NHS Commissioning Board v Bargain Dentist.Com

NHS Commissioning Board v Bargain Dentist.Com

Section 9(5) of the National Health Service Act 2006 precludes the Claimant from suing for breaches of NHS contracts in ordinary courts; disputes must be resolved under the statutory scheme. The legislative scheme is comprehensive and excludes parallel equitable remedies. FHSAU determinations are binding unless challenged by judicial review.

Parties
Claimant: NHS Commissioning Board (known as NHS England); Defendant: Bargain Dentist.com Limited; Defendant: Adrian Yellon
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 June 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil / Summary Judgment And/or Strike Out Applications
Outcome
Defendants' applications to strike out the Claimant’s claims in 875 and 925, and Dr Yellon’s application to strike out the Claimant’s counterclaim in 737, are allowed.
Legal Topics
NHS Contracts, Dispute Resolution, Equitable Remedies, Statutory Interpretation
Health Law Contract Law Administrative Law NHS Contracts Dispute Resolution Equitable Remedies Statutory Interpretation

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

NHS Commissioning Board (known as NHS England)

Claimant

Bargain Dentist.com Limited

Defendant

Adrian Yellon

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Summary Judgment And/or Strike Out Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Claimant can sue for alleged breaches of contract occurring when arrangements were NHS contracts
  2. 2 Whether the Claimant can withhold money from Dr Yellon for sums subject to an unsuccessful reference to the disputes procedure

Ratio Decidendi

Section 9(5) of the National Health Service Act 2006 precludes the Claimant from suing for breaches of NHS contracts in ordinary courts; disputes must be resolved under the statutory scheme. The legislative scheme is comprehensive and excludes parallel equitable remedies. FHSAU determinations are binding unless challenged by judicial review.

Court Disposition

Defendants' applications to strike out the Claimant’s claims in 875 and 925, and Dr Yellon’s application to strike out the Claimant’s counterclaim in 737, are allowed.

Orders

  • Claimant’s claims in 875 and 925 struck out.
  • Claimant’s counterclaim in 737 struck out.