Fox v Wiggins & Ors [2019] EWHC 2713 (QB) (16 October 2019)

Fox v Wiggins & Ors [2019] EWHC 2713 (QB) (16 October 2019)

The Sixth Defendant failed to discharge the burden of proving lack of capacity under the Mental Capacity Act 2005. The medical evidence was insufficient, outdated, and did not address the statutory tests. There was no cogent evidence to rebut the presumption of capacity. Consequently, the application for a declaration of lack of capacity fails. The application to set aside default judgment and for relief from sanctions also fails, as there was no real prospect of defending the claim and no good reason to set aside the judgment.

Citation
[2019] EWHC 2713 (QB)
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Jonathan Fox; Defendant: Hannah Wiggins; Defendant: Ren Aldridge; Defendant: Nadia Javed; Defendant: Brittany McInerny; Defendant: CNF; Defendant/applicant: Katherine Lawrence (by her mother and litigation friend, Jill Lawrence)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 October 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil (defamation and Harassment) / Application to Set Aside Default Judgment and for Declaration of Lack of Capacity
Outcome
Applications dismissed
Legal Topics
Default Judgment, Mental Capacity, Relief From Sanctions, Litigation Friend, CPR Part 21, CPR R 13.3, CPR R 3.9, Defamation Act 2013
Civil Procedure Defamation Harassment Default Judgment Mental Capacity Relief From Sanctions Litigation Friend CPR Part 21 +3 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 5 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jonathan Fox

Claimant/respondent

Hannah Wiggins

Defendant

Ren Aldridge

Defendant

Nadia Javed

Defendant

Brittany McInerny

Defendant

CNF

Defendant

Katherine Lawrence (by her mother and litigation friend, Jill Lawrence)

Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Civil (defamation and Harassment) / Application to Set Aside Default Judgment and for Declaration of Lack of Capacity

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Sixth Defendant lacked capacity to conduct proceedings at the relevant time under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and CPR Part 21
  2. 2 Whether default judgment against the Sixth Defendant should be set aside under CPR r 13.3 and relief from sanctions granted under CPR r 3.9
  3. 3 Whether steps taken prior to appointment of litigation friend should be regularised under CPR r 21.3(4)

Ratio Decidendi

The Sixth Defendant failed to discharge the burden of proving lack of capacity under the Mental Capacity Act 2005. The medical evidence was insufficient, outdated, and did not address the statutory tests. There was no cogent evidence to rebut the presumption of capacity. Consequently, the application for a declaration of lack of capacity fails. The application to set aside default judgment and for relief from sanctions also fails, as there was no real prospect of defending the claim and no good reason to set aside the judgment.

Court Disposition

Applications dismissed

Orders

  • Application for declaration of lack of capacity dismissed
  • Application to set aside default judgment and for relief from sanctions dismissed