Terry v BCS Corporate Acceptances Ltd & Ors

Terry v BCS Corporate Acceptances Ltd & Ors

The court has no jurisdiction to strike out a claim after final judgment; established procedures for challenging judgments allegedly obtained by fraud are by appeal or fresh action, not by post-judgment strike out or CPR 3.1(7) application.

Parties
Appellant: Daniel Terry; Respondent: BCS Corporate Acceptances Limited; Respondent: BCS Offshore Funding Limited; Respondent: John Taylor
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 November 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Setting Aside Judgments, Abuse of Process, Default Judgment, Case Management Powers, Jurisdiction, Finality of Judgments

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 25 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Daniel Terry

Appellant

BCS Corporate Acceptances Limited

Respondent

BCS Offshore Funding Limited

Respondent

John Taylor

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the court has jurisdiction to strike out a claim after final judgment
  2. 2 Whether an application to set aside judgment can be made under CPR 1 and 3, specifically CPR 3.1(7)
  3. 3 Whether the judge should have made directions to progress the matter rather than dismissing the applications

Ratio Decidendi

The court has no jurisdiction to strike out a claim after final judgment; established procedures for challenging judgments allegedly obtained by fraud are by appeal or fresh action, not by post-judgment strike out or CPR 3.1(7) application.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No jurisdiction to strike out claim after final judgment
  • No grounds to set aside judgment under CPR 3.1(7)