Hossain & Ors v Sonali Bank & Anor [2007] EWHC 1431 (QB) (19 June 2007)

Hossain & Ors v Sonali Bank & Anor [2007] EWHC 1431 (QB) (19 June 2007)

The claim regarding housing and foreign allowances could and should have been raised in the original Employment Tribunal proceedings. The late disclosure of the 1989 memo did not justify raising the issue in new proceedings, as it did not provide new relevant information. The current proceedings constitute an abuse of process under Henderson v Henderson principles, and the Master's decision to strike out the claim was correct.

Citation
[2007] EWHC 1431
Parties
Appellants: Mohammad Nazmul Hossain and others; Respondent: Sonali Bank; Respondent: Sonali Bank UK Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 June 2007
Procedural Posture
Appeal / High Court Review of Master's Decision to Strike Out Claim
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Res Judicata, Issue Estoppel, Redundancy Payments, Pension Entitlements
Civil Procedure Employment Law Abuse of Process Res Judicata Issue Estoppel Redundancy Payments Pension Entitlements

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mohammad Nazmul Hossain and others

Appellants

Sonali Bank

Respondent

Sonali Bank UK Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / High Court Review of Master's Decision to Strike Out Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim regarding housing and foreign allowances in pension calculation constitutes an abuse of process under Henderson v Henderson principles
  2. 2 Whether issue estoppel applies to prevent the claim
  3. 3 Whether late disclosure of the 1989 memo justified raising the claim in new proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

The claim regarding housing and foreign allowances could and should have been raised in the original Employment Tribunal proceedings. The late disclosure of the 1989 memo did not justify raising the issue in new proceedings, as it did not provide new relevant information. The current proceedings constitute an abuse of process under Henderson v Henderson principles, and the Master's decision to strike out the claim was correct.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Master's order striking out the claim for abuse of process affirmed