QRT v JBE

QRT v JBE

The Defendant breached the Order of 8 September 2022 by failing to disclose at least one electronic device (the Concealed Phone) used during the relevant period. The breach is serious and persistent, justifying a remedial order requiring immediate compliance, with the Defence to be struck out if not complied with. However, the Defence is not struck out nor is summary judgment granted at this stage, as the threshold for such relief is not met and the Defendant may still contest the claim at trial.

Parties
Claimant: QRT; Defendant: JBE
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 June 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil / Ruling on Applications for Adjournment and Compliance With Court Orders Prior to Trial
Outcome
Adjournment refused; Defence not struck out; summary judgment refused; remedial order for compliance with disclosure of devices granted with 'unless' provision for strike out.
Legal Topics
Misuse of Private Information, Interim and Final Injunctions, Disclosure of Electronic Devices, Compliance With Court Orders, Summary Judgment, Strike Out Applications, Adverse Inferences, Self Incrimination Privilege
Privacy Law Civil Procedure Misuse of Private Information Interim and Final Injunctions Disclosure of Electronic Devices Compliance With Court Orders Summary Judgment Strike Out Applications +2 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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

QRT

Claimant

JBE

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Ruling on Applications for Adjournment and Compliance With Court Orders Prior to Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Defendant breached court orders by failing to disclose all relevant electronic devices
  2. 2 Whether the Defence should be struck out or summary judgment entered due to non-compliance
  3. 3 Whether an adjournment should be granted for medical or procedural reasons

Ratio Decidendi

The Defendant breached the Order of 8 September 2022 by failing to disclose at least one electronic device (the Concealed Phone) used during the relevant period. The breach is serious and persistent, justifying a remedial order requiring immediate compliance, with the Defence to be struck out if not complied with. However, the Defence is not struck out nor is summary judgment granted at this stage, as the threshold for such relief is not met and the Defendant may still contest the claim at trial.

Court Disposition

Adjournment refused; Defence not struck out; summary judgment refused; remedial order for compliance with disclosure of devices granted with 'unless' provision for strike out.

Orders

  • Defendant to provide a further witness statement within 7 days identifying the Concealed Phone and any other undisclosed devices used during the relevant period, stating their whereabouts.
  • Defendant to deliver up any such devices within 14 days for inspection by the SJE.