Ion Manda v Bird & Lovibond (a Firm) & Anor

Ion Manda v Bird & Lovibond (a Firm) & Anor

The court found that the claimant has a realistic prospect of success on the allegations, as actionable damage may have accrued on or after 21 November 2013, and the issues are not suitable for summary determination due to factual and legal complexity. There is a compelling reason for trial, and summary judgment or strike out is not appropriate.

Parties
Claimant: Ion Manda; First Defendant: Bird & Lovibond (a Firm); Second Defendant: Mr Colm Nugent
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 June 2022
Procedural Posture
Professional Negligence / Summary Judgment Application
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Limitation Periods, Strike Out, Summary Judgment, Loss of Chance, Issue Estoppel, Abuse of Process, Disability Discrimination, Withdrawal of Claims, Rule 52 Employment Tribunals Rules
Professional Negligence Employment Law Personal Injury Limitation Periods Strike Out Summary Judgment Loss of Chance Issue Estoppel +4 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 6 Authorities cited 36 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ion Manda

Claimant

Bird & Lovibond (a Firm)

First Defendant

Mr Colm Nugent

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Professional Negligence / Summary Judgment Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether parts of the professional negligence claim are statute-barred under limitation law
  2. 2 When actionable damage accrued for limitation purposes in contract and tort
  3. 3 Whether the claimant has a realistic prospect of success on the pleaded allegations

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the claimant has a realistic prospect of success on the allegations, as actionable damage may have accrued on or after 21 November 2013, and the issues are not suitable for summary determination due to factual and legal complexity. There is a compelling reason for trial, and summary judgment or strike out is not appropriate.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • Summary judgment application by the first defendant is dismissed in respect of all paragraphs remaining in issue.
  • Strike out application not considered due to dismissal of summary judgment application.