Brem v Clark & Anor [2023] EWHC 1358 (KB) (16 June 2023)

Brem v Clark & Anor [2023] EWHC 1358 (KB) (16 June 2023)

The lower court's refusal to adjourn and decision to strike out the claim were within its case management discretion, given the history of the proceedings, the incoherence of the pleadings, the lack of properly pleaded loss, and the disproportionate costs incurred. No serious procedural irregularity or injustice was found to warrant appellate intervention.

Citation
[2023] EWHC 1358 (KB)
Parties
Appellant: Benjamin Kofi Ackah Brem; First Respondent: Dominic Iver Clark; Second Respondent: Rudd Solicitors
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 June 2023
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Strike Out and Costs Order
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Strike Out Applications, Summary Judgment, Adjournment of Hearings, Costs Orders, Conveyancing Disputes, Valuation of Property, Case Management Discretion
Civil Procedure Property Law Professional Negligence Strike Out Applications Summary Judgment Adjournment of Hearings Costs Orders Conveyancing Disputes +2 more

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

Parties

Benjamin Kofi Ackah Brem

Appellant

Dominic Iver Clark

First Respondent

Rudd Solicitors

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Strike Out and Costs Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the lower court erred in refusing an adjournment due to claimant's counsel's illness
  2. 2 Whether the lower court erred in striking out the claim against both defendants
  3. 3 Whether the lower court erred in awarding indemnity costs against the claimant

Ratio Decidendi

The lower court's refusal to adjourn and decision to strike out the claim were within its case management discretion, given the history of the proceedings, the incoherence of the pleadings, the lack of properly pleaded loss, and the disproportionate costs incurred. No serious procedural irregularity or injustice was found to warrant appellate intervention.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Strike out of claim against both defendants upheld