Senna v Henderson & Ors

Senna v Henderson & Ors

The claims were struck out as an abuse of process due to the claimant's serious misconduct, including threats of violence, attempts to suborn perjury, and repeated meritless applications. The pleadings were incoherent, failed to comply with rules and court orders, and disclosed no reasonable cause of action. Summary judgment was also appropriate as the claims had no realistic prospect of success. An extended civil restraint order was warranted due to the claimant's persistent totally without merit applications.

Parties
Claimant: Raj Pal Senna; Defendant: Connor William Henderson; Defendant: CCHG Ltd T/A VPZ; Defendant: Mariangeles Ariadna Nowacki; Defendant: Brodies LLP; Defendant: Callum Robert Henderson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil / Strike Out and Summary Judgment Applications; Judgment
Outcome
Claims struck out; summary judgment for defendants; extended civil restraint order imposed; all claimant's applications dismissed as totally without merit.
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Harassment, Breach of Contract, Fraud, Civil Restraint Orders, Summary Judgment, Strike Out Applications
Civil Procedure Tort Contract Media and Communications Abuse of Process Harassment Breach of Contract Fraud +3 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 5 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Raj Pal Senna

Claimant

Connor William Henderson

Defendant

CCHG Ltd T/A VPZ

Defendant

Mariangeles Ariadna Nowacki

Defendant

Brodies LLP

Defendant

Callum Robert Henderson

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Strike Out and Summary Judgment Applications; Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claims should be struck out as an abuse of process due to the claimant's misconduct
  2. 2 Whether the pleadings disclose any reasonable cause of action or are otherwise defective
  3. 3 Whether summary judgment should be entered for the defendants

Ratio Decidendi

The claims were struck out as an abuse of process due to the claimant's serious misconduct, including threats of violence, attempts to suborn perjury, and repeated meritless applications. The pleadings were incoherent, failed to comply with rules and court orders, and disclosed no reasonable cause of action. Summary judgment was also appropriate as the claims had no realistic prospect of success. An extended civil restraint order was warranted due to the claimant's persistent totally without merit applications.

Court Disposition

Claims struck out; summary judgment for defendants; extended civil restraint order imposed; all claimant's applications dismissed as totally without merit.

Orders

  • First and Second Claims struck out under CPR r 3.4(2)(a)(b)(c)
  • Summary judgment for all defendants under CPR r 24.2