MMG Consulting Engineers Ltd v Harmon & Ors [2020] EWHC 3664 (Ch) (19 November 2020)

MMG Consulting Engineers Ltd v Harmon & Ors [2020] EWHC 3664 (Ch) (19 November 2020)

The claim is struck out as disclosing no valid cause of action and as an abuse of process because it seeks to re-litigate previously determined issues without any fresh evidence of fraud. The claimant has persistently issued meritless applications, justifying an extended civil restraint order.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 3664 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: MMG Consulting Engineers Limited; Defendant: James Harmon; Defendant: Kieran O'Connor; Defendant: Gerald McCarthy; Defendant: Emily Betts; Defendant: Katherine Campbell; Defendant: Sara Kemp; Defendant: Reed Smith LLP
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 November 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil (business and Property Courts, Chancery Division) / Application to Strike Out Claim and for Extended Civil Restraint Orders
Outcome
Claim struck out as totally without merit. Extended civil restraint order made against claimant for 2 years. Claimant's applications dismissed as totally without merit.
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Fraud on the Court, Civil Restraint Orders, Summary Judgment, Strike Out Applications
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Abuse of Process Fraud on the Court Civil Restraint Orders Summary Judgment Strike Out Applications

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

Parties

MMG Consulting Engineers Limited

Claimant

James Harmon

Defendant

Kieran O'Connor

Defendant

Gerald McCarthy

Defendant

Emily Betts

Defendant

Katherine Campbell

Defendant

Sara Kemp

Defendant

Reed Smith LLP

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (business and Property Courts, Chancery Division) / Application to Strike Out Claim and for Extended Civil Restraint Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's action to set aside previous judgments for alleged fraud discloses a valid cause of action
  2. 2 Whether the claim is an abuse of process or vexatious
  3. 3 Whether an extended civil restraint order should be made against the claimant and/or Ms Geary

Ratio Decidendi

The claim is struck out as disclosing no valid cause of action and as an abuse of process because it seeks to re-litigate previously determined issues without any fresh evidence of fraud. The claimant has persistently issued meritless applications, justifying an extended civil restraint order.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out as totally without merit. Extended civil restraint order made against claimant for 2 years. Claimant's applications dismissed as totally without merit.

Orders

  • Claim struck out under CPR 3.4(2)(a) and (b)
  • Extended civil restraint order against claimant for 2 years