Micheal & Ors v Phillips & Ors [2017] EWHC 142 (QB) (02 February 2017)
The First and Second Defendants were in material and serious breach of the Unless Order by failing to provide disclosure, particularly of electronic documents, and failing to explain the loss or destruction of such documents. The breaches were significant, without good reason, and prejudiced the Claimants' ability to prepare for trial. Relief from sanctions was refused, and the Defence and Counterclaim were struck out with the Defendants debarred from defending.
- Citation
- [2017] EWHC 142
- Parties
- Claimant: John Micheal; Claimant: Pauline Wendy Micheal; Claimant: Havering Radio Cars UK Limited; Defendant: Gary Anthony Phillips; Defendant: A1 Group (UK) Limited; Defendant: Lynn Phillips
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 02 February 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Civil / Interlocutory Application for Strike Out and Relief From Sanctions
- Outcome
- Defence and Counterclaim of First and Second Defendants struck out; First and Second Defendants debarred from defending the claim; application for relief from sanctions refused.
- Legal Topics
- Disclosure, Relief From Sanctions, Constructive Trust, Director's Duties, Breach of Court Orders
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
John Micheal
Claimant
Pauline Wendy Micheal
Claimant
Havering Radio Cars UK Limited
Claimant
Gary Anthony Phillips
Defendant
A1 Group (UK) Limited
Defendant
Lynn Phillips
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application for Strike Out and Relief From Sanctions
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the First and Second Defendants complied with the Unless Order for disclosure
- 2 Whether relief from sanctions should be granted to the First and Second Defendants
- 3 Whether Defence and Counterclaim should be struck out and Defendants debarred from defending
Ratio Decidendi
The First and Second Defendants were in material and serious breach of the Unless Order by failing to provide disclosure, particularly of electronic documents, and failing to explain the loss or destruction of such documents. The breaches were significant, without good reason, and prejudiced the Claimants' ability to prepare for trial. Relief from sanctions was refused, and the Defence and Counterclaim were struck out with the Defendants debarred from defending.
Court Disposition
Defence and Counterclaim of First and Second Defendants struck out; First and Second Defendants debarred from defending the claim; application for relief from sanctions refused.
Orders
- Defence and Counterclaim of First and Second Defendants struck out
- First and Second Defendants debarred from defending the claim
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment