Willers v Joyce & Anor Re: Gubay, Deceased [2017] EWHC 1225 (Ch) (23 May 2017)

Willers v Joyce & Anor Re: Gubay, Deceased [2017] EWHC 1225 (Ch) (23 May 2017)

The application to strike out the identified paragraphs is refused. The Claimant is entitled to plead his case on a wider basis regarding control of the group and trust, even if some pleaded facts are broader than strictly necessary. The statement of case, while containing some extraneous material, is not so prolix or irrelevant as to warrant striking out at this stage. The claim for personal injury is not statute-barred as the cause of action accrued within the limitation period. The claim for loss of earnings is not an abuse of process despite overlap with other proceedings, as the causes of action differ. The application is not an abuse of process but is close to being oppressive given...

Citation
[2017] EWHC 1225 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Peter Willers; Defendant: Elena Joyce; Defendant: John Nugent
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 May 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Tort (malicious Prosecution/abuse of Process) / Interlocutory Application (strike Out/summary Judgment)
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
Malicious Prosecution, Abuse of Process, Case Management, Striking Out Pleadings, Summary Judgment
Civil Procedure Tort Law Malicious Prosecution Abuse of Process Case Management Striking Out Pleadings Summary Judgment

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

Parties

Peter Willers

Claimant

Elena Joyce

Defendant

John Nugent

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Tort (malicious Prosecution/abuse of Process) / Interlocutory Application (strike Out/summary Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether parts of the Re-Re-Amended Particulars of Claim should be struck out as irrelevant or prolix under CPR 3.4(2)
  2. 2 Whether summary judgment should be granted on certain heads of loss
  3. 3 Whether the application to strike out is an abuse of process

Ratio Decidendi

The application to strike out the identified paragraphs is refused. The Claimant is entitled to plead his case on a wider basis regarding control of the group and trust, even if some pleaded facts are broader than strictly necessary. The statement of case, while containing some extraneous material, is not so prolix or irrelevant as to warrant striking out at this stage. The claim for personal injury is not statute-barred as the cause of action accrued within the limitation period. The claim for loss of earnings is not an abuse of process despite overlap with other proceedings, as the causes of action differ. The application is not an abuse of process but is close to being oppressive given...

Court Disposition

Application refused

Orders

  • No paragraphs of the Re-Re-Amended Particulars of Claim are struck out.
  • No summary judgment granted on the identified heads of loss.