Smith v Baker [2022] EWHC 2176 (QB) (17 August 2022)

Smith v Baker [2022] EWHC 2176 (QB) (17 August 2022)

Ms Baker's repeated failure to comply with pleading requirements, lack of coherent or complete reply, absence of medical evidence, and history of non-compliance rendered her counterclaim hopeless and obstructed the just disposal of proceedings. Relief from sanctions and further time were refused. The counterclaim was struck out and summary judgment entered against her as no reasonable grounds or prospect of success existed.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 2176 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Samuel Collingwood Smith; Defendant: Esther Ruth Baker
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 August 2022
Procedural Posture
Counterclaim / Strike Out and Summary Judgment Application
Outcome
Counterclaim struck out; summary judgment entered against Ms Baker; relief from sanctions refused; no further time or permission to file pleadings granted.
Legal Topics
Relief From Sanctions, Strike Out, Summary Judgment, Pleading Requirements, Practice Direction 53 B, Protection From Harassment Act 1997
Defamation Harassment Civil Procedure Relief From Sanctions Strike Out Summary Judgment Pleading Requirements Practice Direction 53 B +1 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 4 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Samuel Collingwood Smith

Claimant

Esther Ruth Baker

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Counterclaim / Strike Out and Summary Judgment Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Ms Baker should be granted relief from sanctions for failure to serve Amended Reply to Defence to Counterclaim
  2. 2 Whether Ms Baker's counterclaim should be struck out and/or summary judgment entered against her
  3. 3 Compliance with Practice Direction 53B and Griffiths Order

Ratio Decidendi

Ms Baker's repeated failure to comply with pleading requirements, lack of coherent or complete reply, absence of medical evidence, and history of non-compliance rendered her counterclaim hopeless and obstructed the just disposal of proceedings. Relief from sanctions and further time were refused. The counterclaim was struck out and summary judgment entered against her as no reasonable grounds or prospect of success existed.

Court Disposition

Counterclaim struck out; summary judgment entered against Ms Baker; relief from sanctions refused; no further time or permission to file pleadings granted.

Orders

  • Strike out Amended Counterclaim
  • Refuse relief from sanctions for failure to serve Amended Reply to Defence to Counterclaim