Western Avenue Properties Limited & Anor v Sadhana Soni & Anor

Western Avenue Properties Limited & Anor v Sadhana Soni & Anor

The defendants' delay in prosecuting the counterclaim was inordinate and inexcusable, amounting to abuse of process. There was no satisfactory explanation for the delay, and the defendants' conduct constituted tactical warehousing. The counterclaim should be struck out to maintain parity with the treatment of the claim.

Parties
Claimant: Western Avenue Properties Limited and Another; Defendant: Sadhana Soni and Another
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 August 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment on Application to Strike Out Counterclaim
Outcome
Counterclaim struck out for abuse of process and want of prosecution.
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Delay in Prosecution, Strike Out Applications, Counterclaim Procedure
Civil Procedure Abuse of Process Delay in Prosecution Strike Out Applications Counterclaim Procedure

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 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Western Avenue Properties Limited and Another

Claimant

Sadhana Soni and Another

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment on Application to Strike Out Counterclaim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the counterclaim should be struck out for abuse of process or want of prosecution due to inordinate and inexcusable delay

Ratio Decidendi

The defendants' delay in prosecuting the counterclaim was inordinate and inexcusable, amounting to abuse of process. There was no satisfactory explanation for the delay, and the defendants' conduct constituted tactical warehousing. The counterclaim should be struck out to maintain parity with the treatment of the claim.

Court Disposition

Counterclaim struck out for abuse of process and want of prosecution.

Orders

  • The counterclaim is struck out pursuant to CPR rule 3.4(b).
  • Defendants to pay claimants' costs of the counterclaim.