Olsen & Anor v Griffin & Ors [2019] EWHC 78 (QB) (25 January 2019)

Olsen & Anor v Griffin & Ors [2019] EWHC 78 (QB) (25 January 2019)

The amended pleadings did not disclose a coherent, legally sound, or factually supported cause of action with a realistic prospect of success. The defects in the claim could not be cured by amendment. The claim was therefore struck out and permission to amend refused.

Citation
[2019] EWHC 78
Parties
Claimant: Richard Olsen; Claimant: Olsen Partnership Ltd; Defendant: Richard Griffin; Defendant: Andrew West; Defendant: Andrew Horsley; Defendant: Volter (UK) Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 January 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil (queen's Bench Division) / Application for Summary Judgment And/or Strike Out; Application to Amend Pleadings
Outcome
Claim struck out; permission to amend refused
Legal Topics
Implied Contract, Express Oral Contract, Wrongful Dismissal, Shareholders' Agreement, Strike Out, Summary Judgment, Amendment of Pleadings
Contract Law Company Law Employment Law Tort Law Implied Contract Express Oral Contract Wrongful Dismissal Shareholders' Agreement +3 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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Richard Olsen

Claimant

Olsen Partnership Ltd

Claimant

Richard Griffin

Defendant

Andrew West

Defendant

Andrew Horsley

Defendant

Volter (UK) Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (queen's Bench Division) / Application for Summary Judgment And/or Strike Out; Application to Amend Pleadings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants' pleadings disclosed a viable cause of action in contract, tort, or under the Shareholders' Agreement
  2. 2 Whether the claimants should be permitted to amend their pleadings
  3. 3 Whether the claim should be struck out or subject to summary judgment

Ratio Decidendi

The amended pleadings did not disclose a coherent, legally sound, or factually supported cause of action with a realistic prospect of success. The defects in the claim could not be cured by amendment. The claim was therefore struck out and permission to amend refused.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out; permission to amend refused

Orders

  • Claim struck out in its entirety
  • Permission to amend pleadings refused