Bark-Jones v Lynch [2026] EWHC 671 (KB) (18 February 2026)

Bark-Jones v Lynch [2026] EWHC 671 (KB) (18 February 2026)

Severance of unenforceable clauses did not impermissibly change the character of the contract; the Tomlin Order remained enforceable. Clause 1 constituted a binding admission of debt. No grounds or evidence justified withdrawal of the admission. Summary judgment was properly granted.

Citation
[2026] EWHC 671 (KB)
Parties
Respondent/claimant: Mr Giles Bark-Jones; Appellant/defendant: Mr Andrew Lynch
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 February 2026
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Enforcement of Tomlin Order, Severance of Contract Terms, Withdrawal of Admissions, Summary Judgment
Contract Law Civil Procedure Enforcement of Tomlin Order Severance of Contract Terms Withdrawal of Admissions 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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Giles Bark-Jones

Respondent/claimant

Mr Andrew Lynch

Appellant/defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether unenforceable clauses in Tomlin Order can be severed
  2. 2 Whether Tomlin Order is enforceable after severance
  3. 3 Whether clause 1 constitutes a binding admission of debt

Ratio Decidendi

Severance of unenforceable clauses did not impermissibly change the character of the contract; the Tomlin Order remained enforceable. Clause 1 constituted a binding admission of debt. No grounds or evidence justified withdrawal of the admission. Summary judgment was properly granted.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Tomlin Order enforced as severed
  • Summary judgment for claimant on admitted debt