Olsen & Anor v Griffin & Ors

Olsen & Anor v Griffin & Ors

The amended pleadings do not disclose a coherent, legally sound, or factually substantiated cause of action; none of the proposed heads of claim meet the legal requirements for viability; permission to amend is refused and the claim is struck out.

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 / Application for Summary Judgment And/or Strike Out; Application to Amend Pleadings
Outcome
Claim struck out; permission to amend refused.
Legal Topics
Strike Out, Summary Judgment, Implied Contract, Express Oral Contract, Wrongful Dismissal, Shareholders’ Agreement, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Misrepresentation, Conspiracy to Injure, Landlord and Tenant Act 1954
Company Law Contract Law Employment Law Defamation Strike Out Summary Judgment Implied Contract Express Oral Contract +6 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 / Application for Summary Judgment And/or Strike Out; Application to Amend Pleadings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants' pleadings disclose a viable cause of action in contract, company law, employment law, or defamation
  2. 2 Whether the claimants should be permitted to amend their pleadings
  3. 3 Whether the amended claim has a realistic prospect of success

Ratio Decidendi

The amended pleadings do not disclose a coherent, legally sound, or factually substantiated cause of action; none of the proposed heads of claim meet the legal requirements for viability; permission to amend is refused and the claim is struck out.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out; permission to amend refused.

Orders

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