Carr v Conlon

Carr v Conlon

Summary judgment is inappropriate where allegations of fraud or perjury are made; such matters require a full trial to allow the defendant to provide an explanation and for proper pleading of all relevant facts.

Parties
Claimant/appellant: Malcolm Carr; Defendant/respondent: Conlon; Defendants: Bower Cotton (BC) partners; Eighth Defendant: Paul Simms
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2006
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal (and Extension of Time) From High Court Order Refusing Summary Judgment
Outcome
application refused
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Perjury, Fiduciary Duty, Breach of Trust, Misrepresentation

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Malcolm Carr

Claimant/appellant

Conlon

Defendant/respondent

Bower Cotton (BC) partners

Defendants

Paul Simms

Eighth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal (and Extension of Time) From High Court Order Refusing Summary Judgment

  1. 1 Whether summary judgment should be granted on the basis of alleged perjury by the defendant in prior proceedings
  2. 2 Whether the orders of Blackburne J and the Court of Appeal in the earlier action should be set aside for alleged perjury
  3. 3 Whether the new evidence (NatWest schedule) justifies summary judgment

Ratio Decidendi

Summary judgment is inappropriate where allegations of fraud or perjury are made; such matters require a full trial to allow the defendant to provide an explanation and for proper pleading of all relevant facts.

Court Disposition

application refused

Orders

  • Application for permission to appeal refused