Goss v BM Samuels Finance Group Plc

Goss v BM Samuels Finance Group Plc

The grounds of appeal do not raise any important point of principle or practice, nor is there any compelling reason to grant permission for a second appeal. The judge was entitled to exclude the further evidence as it was speculative and not capable of affecting the outcome. The evidence did not establish any breach or misconduct relevant to the present case.

Parties
Applicant: Goss; Respondent: BM Samuels Finance Group PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 June 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal (second Appeal)
Outcome
Permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Appeals, Admission of Further Evidence
Civil Procedure Summary Judgment Appeals Admission of Further Evidence

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Goss

Applicant

BM Samuels Finance Group PLC

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal (second Appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge erred in evaluating the evidence and finding no breach of obligations by the Respondent
  2. 2 Whether the Master and judge failed to properly apply principles from EasyAir
  3. 3 Whether summary judgment was improperly granted given alleged suspicious circumstances (Miles v Bull point)

Ratio Decidendi

The grounds of appeal do not raise any important point of principle or practice, nor is there any compelling reason to grant permission for a second appeal. The judge was entitled to exclude the further evidence as it was speculative and not capable of affecting the outcome. The evidence did not establish any breach or misconduct relevant to the present case.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal refused