Sweetman v Shepherd & Ors [2007] EWHC 137 (QB) (02 February 2007)

Sweetman v Shepherd & Ors [2007] EWHC 137 (QB) (02 February 2007)

The claims are struck out because the delay is inordinate and inexcusable, the passage of time and loss of evidence make a fair trial impossible, and the claims constitute an abuse of process. The court finds that the claimant and his solicitors failed to prosecute the actions with the required diligence, and that the interests of justice require the proceedings to be brought to an end.

Citation
[2007] EWHC 137
Parties
Claimant: Keith Ivan Eugene Sweetman; Defendant: Bernard Robert M Shepherd; Defendant: Nigel Robert Jones; Defendant: John Harry Roberts; Defendant: Bernard Robert Porter; Defendant: David S Johnson; Defendant: Ronald Steven Nathan; Defendant: David Anthony Rubin; Defendant: Stephen Brian Simmons; Defendant: Deborah Jane Levy; Defendant: Keith A Price; Defendant: Harold B. Berwin; Defendant: Russell Jones Walker (a firm); Defendant: Angus McCullough
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 February 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil / Application to Strike Out Claim at Interlocutory Stage
Outcome
Claims struck out
Legal Topics
Strike Out Applications, Limitation of Actions, Delay and Abuse of Process, Vicarious Liability, Solicitor Negligence, Fraudulent Misrepresentation
Civil Procedure Professional Negligence Fraud Strike Out Applications Limitation of Actions Delay and Abuse of Process Vicarious Liability Solicitor Negligence +1 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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Keith Ivan Eugene Sweetman

Claimant

Bernard Robert M Shepherd

Defendant

Nigel Robert Jones

Defendant

John Harry Roberts

Defendant

Bernard Robert Porter

Defendant

David S Johnson

Defendant

Ronald Steven Nathan

Defendant

David Anthony Rubin

Defendant

Stephen Brian Simmons

Defendant

Deborah Jane Levy

Defendant

Keith A Price

Defendant

Harold B. Berwin

Defendant

Russell Jones Walker (a firm)

Defendant

Angus McCullough

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Application to Strike Out Claim at Interlocutory Stage

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claims should be struck out for inordinate and inexcusable delay
  2. 2 Whether a fair trial is possible given the passage of time and loss of evidence
  3. 3 Whether the claims are an abuse of process

Ratio Decidendi

The claims are struck out because the delay is inordinate and inexcusable, the passage of time and loss of evidence make a fair trial impossible, and the claims constitute an abuse of process. The court finds that the claimant and his solicitors failed to prosecute the actions with the required diligence, and that the interests of justice require the proceedings to be brought to an end.

Court Disposition

Claims struck out

Orders

  • All three actions are struck out as an abuse of process and/or for inordinate and inexcusable delay.
  • No trial will take place on the merits of the claims.