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 do not disclose a coherent, legally sound, or factually substantiated cause of action; none of the heads of claim meet the legal requirements for contract, company, employment, or tort law; permission to amend is refused and the claim is struck out as having no realistic prospect of success.

Citation
[2019] EWHC 78 (QB)
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 / Summary Judgment/strike Out Application
Outcome
Claim struck out; permission to amend refused.
Legal Topics
Implied Contract, Express Oral Contract, Wrongful Dismissal, Shareholders' Agreement, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Common Law Conspiracy, Tortious Misrepresentation, Breach of Statutory Duty, Defamation
Contract Law Company Law Employment Law Defamation Implied Contract Express Oral Contract Wrongful Dismissal Shareholders' Agreement +4 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 / Summary Judgment/strike Out Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants' pleadings disclose a viable cause of action in contract, company, employment, or tort law
  2. 2 Whether permission to amend pleadings should be granted
  3. 3 Whether the claim should be struck out or subject to summary judgment

Ratio Decidendi

The amended pleadings do not disclose a coherent, legally sound, or factually substantiated cause of action; none of the heads of claim meet the legal requirements for contract, company, employment, or tort law; permission to amend is refused and the claim is struck out as having no realistic prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out; permission to amend refused.

Orders

  • Claim struck out.
  • Permission to amend pleadings refused.