O'Hara v Markham [2018] EWHC 3796 (QB) (13 November 2018)

O'Hara v Markham [2018] EWHC 3796 (QB) (13 November 2018)

The application is an abuse of process as the defendant's claims have been previously litigated, are unsupported by credible evidence, and there is no fiduciary relationship or sufficient evidence to justify an account. Even on the merits, the claims for credits are unfounded and the application would be dismissed.

Citation
[2018] EWHC 3796 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Moira O'Hara; Defendant: Paul Markham
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 November 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil / Application to Strike Out and for Account Post Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed as abuse of process
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Account of Profits, Enforcement of Judgment, Trusts, Bailment
Civil Procedure Trusts and Equity Enforcement of Judgments Abuse of Process Account of Profits Enforcement of Judgment Trusts Bailment

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Moira O'Hara

Claimant

Paul Markham

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Application to Strike Out and for Account Post Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant is entitled to an account to determine sums due under the judgment
  2. 2 Whether the application for an account is an abuse of process
  3. 3 Whether credits should be allowed to the defendant for chattels, rents, or other sums

Ratio Decidendi

The application is an abuse of process as the defendant's claims have been previously litigated, are unsupported by credible evidence, and there is no fiduciary relationship or sufficient evidence to justify an account. Even on the merits, the claims for credits are unfounded and the application would be dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed as abuse of process

Orders

  • Defendant's application for an account is struck out as an abuse of process
  • Application would have been dismissed on the merits in any event