Malmesbury & Ors v Strutt & Parker (A Partnership)

Malmesbury & Ors v Strutt & Parker (A Partnership)

The court held that it had no jurisdiction to reconsider its finding on the turnover rent percentage because an order giving effect to the judgment had been sealed, rendering the court functus officio. Even if jurisdiction existed, there were no strong reasons or exceptional circumstances to justify reconsideration. Any further challenge must be by way of appeal to the Court of Appeal.

Parties
Claimant: Seventh Earl of Malmesbury; Claimant: William John Maltby; Claimant: Kathleen Hobbs; Claimant: Wilsco 283 Limited; Defendant: Strutt & Parker (A partnership)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 October 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Professional Negligence / Post Judgment Application for Reconsideration of Findings And/or Permission to Appeal
Outcome
Application for reconsideration and renewed permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Reconsideration of Judgment, Functus Officio, Measure of Damages, Jurisdiction to Recall Judgment
Professional Negligence Civil Procedure Reconsideration of Judgment Functus Officio Measure of Damages Jurisdiction to Recall Judgment

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Seventh Earl of Malmesbury

Claimant

William John Maltby

Claimant

Kathleen Hobbs

Claimant

Wilsco 283 Limited

Claimant

Strutt & Parker (A partnership)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Professional Negligence / Post Judgment Application for Reconsideration of Findings And/or Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court has jurisdiction to reconsider its finding on the likely turnover rent percentage after judgment and sealing of the order
  2. 2 Whether the claimants are entitled to a reconsideration of the judgment or renewed permission to appeal on the turnover rent issue

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that it had no jurisdiction to reconsider its finding on the turnover rent percentage because an order giving effect to the judgment had been sealed, rendering the court functus officio. Even if jurisdiction existed, there were no strong reasons or exceptional circumstances to justify reconsideration. Any further challenge must be by way of appeal to the Court of Appeal.

Court Disposition

Application for reconsideration and renewed permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • Claimants' application for reconsideration of the judgment or renewed permission to appeal is refused
  • Strutt & Parker to pay the claimants one half of their costs of the application, namely £4,130