Farrar v Leongreen Ltd

Farrar v Leongreen Ltd

The claim for mesne profits was not barred by res judicata because each day of trespass constituted a separate cause of action, and the second and third principles of res judicata did not apply as the causes of action were not identical in both proceedings.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Peter Farrar; Respondent: Leongreen Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 December 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Judgment of Central London County Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Res Judicata, Mesne Profits, Cause of Action Estoppel, Abuse of Process
Civil Procedure Res Judicata Mesne Profits Cause of Action Estoppel Abuse of Process

Source-derived case record

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 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Farrar

Appellant

Leongreen Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Judgment of Central London County Court

  1. 1 Whether the doctrine of res judicata precluded the respondent from claiming mesne profits in a second action after obtaining a possession order in the first action without claiming mesne profits

Ratio Decidendi

The claim for mesne profits was not barred by res judicata because each day of trespass constituted a separate cause of action, and the second and third principles of res judicata did not apply as the causes of action were not identical in both proceedings.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed