Andresen & Anor v Lovell

The First Claimant failed to disclose a cause of action for harassment as required by the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. The evidence relied upon was either historic, isolated, or not directed at her, and there was no real or continuing threat. The injunction was also set aside for material non-disclosure and misleading the court on key facts.

Parties: Claimant: Jenny Andresen; Claimant: Anne Andresen; Defendant: Paul Lovell
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 21 December 2009
Procedural Posture: Civil / Judgment on Application to Strike Out and Set Aside Injunction
Outcome: First Claimant's claim struck out; injunction set aside
Legal Topics: Protection From Harassment Act 1997, Injunctions, Ex Parte Applications, Non Disclosure, Summary Judgment

Civil Procedure Family Law Harassment Protection From Harassment Act 1997 Injunctions Ex Parte Applications Non Disclosure Summary Judgment

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2

Parties

Jenny Andresen

Claimant

Anne Andresen

Claimant

Paul Lovell

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment on Application to Strike Out and Set Aside Injunction

Legal Issues

1 Whether the First Claimant disclosed a cause of action for harassment under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997
2 Whether the ex parte injunction should be set aside for non-disclosure of material facts
3 Whether summary judgment or strike out is appropriate

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

First Claimant's claim struck out; injunction set aside

Orders

The claim of the First Claimant is struck out as disclosing no cause of action.
The injunction of 17 August is set aside for non-disclosure and lack of frankness.