Barnes v Black Horse Ltd [2012] EWHC 1950 (QB) (14 June 2012)

Given the imminent Supreme Court decision in Harrison v Black Horse, which will address the core legal issues in these cases and many similar PPI claims, and considering the overriding objective of proportionality, cost-saving, and efficient use of court resources, it is appropriate and just to stay both actions pending the Supreme Court's judgment.

Citation: [2012] EWHC 1950 (QB)
Parties: Claimant: Barnes; Claimant: McIlquham; Defendant: Black Horse Limited
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 14 June 2012
Procedural Posture: Civil / Interlocutory Application for Stay Pending Supreme Court Decision
Outcome: Stay granted
Legal Topics: Payment Protection Insurance (ppi) Mis Selling, Unfair Relationship Provisions, Extortionate Credit Bargains, Case Management Stays

Consumer Credit Civil Procedure Payment Protection Insurance (ppi) Mis Selling Unfair Relationship Provisions Extortionate Credit Bargains Case Management Stays

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6

Parties

Barnes

Claimant

McIlquham

Claimant

Black Horse Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Application for Stay Pending Supreme Court Decision

Legal Issues

1 Whether proceedings should be stayed pending the Supreme Court decision in Harrison v Black Horse on PPI mis-selling and unfair relationship provisions
2 Whether a stay is proportionate and in accordance with the overriding objective under CPR

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Stay granted

Orders

Both actions (Barnes and McIlquham) are stayed pending the Supreme Court decision in Harrison v Black Horse.
Liberty to apply to lift the stay if there is a material change of circumstances.