June Dorothy Marshall & Anor v Dean Kimberley Marshall & Anor

June Dorothy Marshall & Anor v Dean Kimberley Marshall & Anor

The defendants made a clear pre-action admission in formal correspondence that the partnership dissolved on Peter's death, which was relied upon by the claimants. The defendants failed to provide a full and frank explanation for withdrawal, acted with undue delay, and maintained their change of position on a without prejudice basis for years. The interests of justice, conduct, and grounds for withdrawal all weigh against permitting withdrawal of the admission.

Parties
Claimant: June Dorothy Marshall; Claimant: Sharon Karina Edwards; Defendant: Dean Kimberley Marshall; Defendant: Gary Peter Marshall
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 September 2026
Procedural Posture
Civil / Ruling on Applications to Strike Out and Withdraw Pre Action Admission
Outcome
Defendants' application to withdraw pre-action admission refused; claimants' application for judgment on admission granted.
Legal Topics
Dissolution of Partnership, Pre Action Admissions, Withdrawal of Admissions, Estoppel, CPR 14, Winding Up Partnership
Partnership Law Civil Procedure Dissolution of Partnership Pre Action Admissions Withdrawal of Admissions Estoppel CPR 14 Winding Up Partnership

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 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

June Dorothy Marshall

Claimant

Sharon Karina Edwards

Claimant

Dean Kimberley Marshall

Defendant

Gary Peter Marshall

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Ruling on Applications to Strike Out and Withdraw Pre Action Admission

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Was an admission within the meaning of CPR Part 14 made by the defendants in 2019?
  2. 2 Should the court grant the defendants permission to withdraw that admission under CPR 14.5?

Ratio Decidendi

The defendants made a clear pre-action admission in formal correspondence that the partnership dissolved on Peter's death, which was relied upon by the claimants. The defendants failed to provide a full and frank explanation for withdrawal, acted with undue delay, and maintained their change of position on a without prejudice basis for years. The interests of justice, conduct, and grounds for withdrawal all weigh against permitting withdrawal of the admission.

Court Disposition

Defendants' application to withdraw pre-action admission refused; claimants' application for judgment on admission granted.

Orders

  • Defendants are bound by the admission that the partnership dissolved on Peter's death.
  • Strike out of relevant parts of the defence flowing from the admission.