Pineway Ltd v London Mining Plc [2010] EWHC 1143 (Comm) (20 May 2010)

Pineway Ltd v London Mining Plc [2010] EWHC 1143 (Comm) (20 May 2010)

The applicant failed to establish a properly arguable claim with a real prospect of success, the authenticity and validity of the assignments were not demonstrated, the documents sought were not clearly within standard disclosure, and the application was speculative and not outside the usual run of cases. The court therefore refused to grant pre-action disclosure both on jurisdictional and discretionary grounds.

Citation
[2010] EWHC 1143 (Comm)
Parties
Applicant: Pineway Limited; First Respondent: London Mining Company Limited; Second Respondent: London Mining PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 May 2010
Procedural Posture
Application for Pre Action Disclosure / Adjourned Application Hearing and Determination
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
Pre Action Disclosure, Jurisdiction, Assignment of Claims, Champerty, Standard Disclosure, Discretionary Relief
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Pre Action Disclosure Jurisdiction Assignment of Claims Champerty Standard Disclosure Discretionary Relief

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

Parties

Pineway Limited

Applicant

London Mining Company Limited

First Respondent

London Mining PLC

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Pre Action Disclosure / Adjourned Application Hearing and Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to pre-action disclosure under CPR 31.16 and Section 33 of the Senior Courts Act 1981
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has a properly arguable claim with a real prospect of success
  3. 3 Whether the assignments relied upon by the applicant are authentic and valid

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to establish a properly arguable claim with a real prospect of success, the authenticity and validity of the assignments were not demonstrated, the documents sought were not clearly within standard disclosure, and the application was speculative and not outside the usual run of cases. The court therefore refused to grant pre-action disclosure both on jurisdictional and discretionary grounds.

Court Disposition

Application refused