Spurgeon & Ors v Capita PLC [2026] EWHC 241 (KB) (09 February 2026)

Spurgeon & Ors v Capita PLC [2026] EWHC 241 (KB) (09 February 2026)

The defendant's application to strike out the claims on the Abuse Ground fails. The court finds that the claimants' evidence and particulars of distress, even if drafted generically or with repeated phrases, do not amount to abuse of process. Each claimant has verified their claim and the legal principles established by the Court of Appeal in Farley v Paymaster confirm that compensation for non-material damage, including distress, is recoverable without a threshold of seriousness. The claims are properly pleaded and should proceed to determination on their merits.

Citation
[2026] EWHC 241 (KB)
Parties
Claimants: Neil Spurgeon and Others; Defendant: Capita PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 February 2026
Procedural Posture
Data Protection Breach Claim (multi Party) / Strike Out/reverse Summary Judgment Application (abuse Ground)
Outcome
Defendant's application to strike out claims on Abuse Ground dismissed; claims to proceed.
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Strike Out Applications, Compensation for Non Material Damage, Aggravated and Exemplary Damages, Procedural Requirements for Multi Claimant Actions
Data Protection Civil Procedure Tort Abuse of Process Strike Out Applications Compensation for Non Material Damage Aggravated and Exemplary Damages Procedural Requirements for Multi Claimant Actions

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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Neil Spurgeon and Others

Claimants

Capita PLC

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Data Protection Breach Claim (multi Party) / Strike Out/reverse Summary Judgment Application (abuse Ground)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants' evidence and particulars of distress are improperly tainted by solicitors and amount to abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether claims for distress and non-material damage are properly pleaded under GDPR and DPA 2018
  3. 3 Whether generic pleading in multi-claimant data breach actions is permissible

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant's application to strike out the claims on the Abuse Ground fails. The court finds that the claimants' evidence and particulars of distress, even if drafted generically or with repeated phrases, do not amount to abuse of process. Each claimant has verified their claim and the legal principles established by the Court of Appeal in Farley v Paymaster confirm that compensation for non-material damage, including distress, is recoverable without a threshold of seriousness. The claims are properly pleaded and should proceed to determination on their merits.

Court Disposition

Defendant's application to strike out claims on Abuse Ground dismissed; claims to proceed.

Orders

  • Claims not struck out; litigation to continue on merits.
  • Costs reserved; no immediate order as to costs.