Andrew Edward McCarthy v Graham Brian Proctor

Andrew Edward McCarthy v Graham Brian Proctor

The claimant's claim in negligent misstatement has a real prospect of success and raises triable issues. England and Wales is the appropriate forum for the dispute given the parties' connections, the language of the relevant interactions, and the risk of a time-bar in Spain. There was no material non-disclosure...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: Andrew Edward McCarthy; Defendant: Graham Brian Proctor
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 March 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil (business and Property) / Interlocutory Application to Set Aside Permission to Serve Out of Jurisdiction
Outcome
Defendant's application dismissed; permission to serve out of jurisdiction confirmed.
Legal Topics
Service Out of Jurisdiction, Forum Non Conveniens, Negligent Misstatement, Restitution, Full and Frank Disclosure
Private International Law Contract Law Tort Law Service Out of Jurisdiction Forum Non Conveniens Negligent Misstatement Restitution Full and Frank Disclosure

Source-derived case record

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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Andrew Edward McCarthy

Claimant

Graham Brian Proctor

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (business and Property) / Interlocutory Application to Set Aside Permission to Serve Out of Jurisdiction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim for negligent misstatement has a real prospect of success
  2. 2 Whether England and Wales is the appropriate forum for the claim
  3. 3 Whether there was a failure of full and frank disclosure justifying setting aside permission to serve out

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant's claim in negligent misstatement has a real prospect of success and raises triable issues. England and Wales is the appropriate forum for the dispute given the parties' connections, the language of the relevant interactions, and the risk of a time-bar in Spain. There was no material non-disclosure justifying setting aside permission to serve out. Permission to serve out of the jurisdiction is confirmed.

Court Disposition

Defendant's application dismissed; permission to serve out of jurisdiction confirmed.

Orders

  • Permission to serve out of the jurisdiction confirmed.
  • No order setting aside for alleged non-disclosure.