National Landlords Association v Stimpson [2008] EWHC 2340 (QB) (31 July 2008)

National Landlords Association v Stimpson [2008] EWHC 2340 (QB) (31 July 2008)

The claimant failed to demonstrate a serious issue to be tried in trespass or other causes of action, as it did not have possession or a right to possession of the premises, and the evidence did not support the continuation of the injunctions. There was also material non-disclosure to the court on the ex parte application. The application for continuation of the injunctions was dismissed.

Citation
[2008] EWHC 2340 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: National Landlords Association; Defendant: Michael Stimpson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 July 2008
Procedural Posture
Interim Injunction Application / Hearing on Continuation of Interim Injunction
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Interim Injunctions, Trespass to Land, Unlawful Interference With Goods, Unlawful Interference With Economic Interests, Directors' Powers and Appointment, Transfer of Undertakings (tupe), Data Protection Breach, Disclosure Obligations in Ex Parte Applications
Civil Procedure Company Law Property Law Employment Law Data Protection Interim Injunctions Trespass to Land Unlawful Interference With Goods +5 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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

National Landlords Association

Claimant

Michael Stimpson

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interim Injunction Application / Hearing on Continuation of Interim Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant (NLA) had a serious issue to be tried entitling it to interim injunctive relief against the defendant (Stimpson)
  2. 2 Whether there was material non-disclosure by the claimant in obtaining the original ex parte injunction
  3. 3 Whether the claimant had a cause of action in trespass, unlawful interference with goods, or unlawful interference with economic interests

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to demonstrate a serious issue to be tried in trespass or other causes of action, as it did not have possession or a right to possession of the premises, and the evidence did not support the continuation of the injunctions. There was also material non-disclosure to the court on the ex parte application. The application for continuation of the injunctions was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application for continuation of interim injunctions against Mr Stimpson is dismissed.