Garnham v Millar & Ors [2015] EWHC 274 (Ch) (11 February 2015)

Garnham v Millar & Ors [2015] EWHC 274 (Ch) (11 February 2015)

The proceedings are an abuse of process as they repeat matters already decided in previous litigation, amount to unjust harassment of the defendants, and are totally without merit. The claimant has persistently issued meritless claims and applications, justifying an extended civil restraint order.

Citation
[2015] EWHC 274 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Joseph Charles Garnham; Defendant: Christopher Ian Millar; Defendant: Jane Marie Whiting; Defendant: Downs Solicitors (a firm); Defendant: The Executors of Mrs I. E. G. Bristow's Estate; Defendant: Downs Solicitors LLP
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 February 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil / Application to Strike Out and for Civil Restraint Order
Outcome
Claim struck out as totally without merit; extended civil restraint order made against claimant.
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Strike Out Applications, Civil Restraint Orders, Res Judicata, Collateral Attack, Disclosure, Professional Misconduct
Civil Procedure Abuse of Process Strike Out Applications Civil Restraint Orders Res Judicata Collateral Attack Disclosure Professional Misconduct

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joseph Charles Garnham

Claimant

Christopher Ian Millar

Defendant

Jane Marie Whiting

Defendant

Downs Solicitors (a firm)

Defendant

The Executors of Mrs I. E. G. Bristow's Estate

Defendant

Downs Solicitors LLP

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Application to Strike Out and for Civil Restraint Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim should be struck out as disclosing no reasonable grounds or as an abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether the proceedings are a collateral attack on previous judgments
  3. 3 Whether a civil restraint order (ECRO) should be made against the claimant

Ratio Decidendi

The proceedings are an abuse of process as they repeat matters already decided in previous litigation, amount to unjust harassment of the defendants, and are totally without merit. The claimant has persistently issued meritless claims and applications, justifying an extended civil restraint order.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out as totally without merit; extended civil restraint order made against claimant.

Orders

  • Claim struck out against all defendants
  • Extended civil restraint order (ECRO) for two years against Mr Garnham