Neil Spurgeon & Ors v Capita PLC

Neil Spurgeon & Ors v Capita PLC

There is no abuse of process in the claimants' lawyers formulating particulars of damage using generic or evaluative language, provided each claimant has assented to the pleading and believes in the facts stated. The process adopted, while open to criticism regarding clarity and the use of certain terms, does not justify the draconian remedy of striking out all claims. Any issues as to the accuracy, credibility, or effect of the pleadings are to be addressed by clarification, amendment, or at trial, not by summary disposal.

Parties
Claimants: Neil Spurgeon and Others; Defendant: Capita PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 September 2026
Procedural Posture
Civil Data Protection Breach / Interlocutory Application for Strike Out/reverse Summary Judgment (abuse of Process)
Outcome
Application to strike out claims on grounds of abuse of process refused.
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Strike Out Applications, Statements of Truth, Damages for Data Breach, Pleading Standards
Data Protection Civil Procedure Abuse of Process Strike Out Applications Statements of Truth Damages for Data Breach Pleading Standards

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

Parties

Neil Spurgeon and Others

Claimants

Capita PLC

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Data Protection Breach / Interlocutory Application for Strike Out/reverse Summary Judgment (abuse of Process)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants' particulars of claim and process of their creation constitute an abuse of process justifying strike-out of all claims
  2. 2 Whether the use of generic or 'levelled-up' pleadings and leading questions by claimants' lawyers taints the evidence and precludes a fair trial
  3. 3 Whether the claimants' approval of the pleadings, including statements of distress, is sufficient to meet the requirements of the Civil Procedure Rules and professional conduct

Ratio Decidendi

There is no abuse of process in the claimants' lawyers formulating particulars of damage using generic or evaluative language, provided each claimant has assented to the pleading and believes in the facts stated. The process adopted, while open to criticism regarding clarity and the use of certain terms, does not justify the draconian remedy of striking out all claims. Any issues as to the accuracy, credibility, or effect of the pleadings are to be addressed by clarification, amendment, or at trial, not by summary disposal.

Court Disposition

Application to strike out claims on grounds of abuse of process refused.

Orders

  • No strike-out of claims on Authority or Abuse Grounds.
  • Parties to consider reformulation of certain pleaded terms (e.g., 'tormented', 'violation of security', 'betrayal of trust') and address consequential matters at a further hearing.