Hersi & Co Solicitors & Anor v The Lord Chancellor

Hersi & Co Solicitors & Anor v The Lord Chancellor

Witness immunity applies to the allegations in the counterclaim and defence, barring civil claims for evidence given in judicial review proceedings; allegations of fraud and misfeasance are not sufficiently particularised; the counterclaim constitutes an abuse of process as issues should have been litigated in the...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant/defendant: Hersi & Co Solicitors; Appellant/defendant: Ahmed Hersi; Respondent/claimant: The Lord Chancellor (as successor to the Legal Services Commission)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 April 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Strike Out and Summary Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Witness Immunity, Misfeasance in Public Office, Abuse of Process, Pleading Requirements, Summary Judgment, Malicious Prosecution, Defamation
Civil Procedure Public Law Tort Law Witness Immunity Misfeasance in Public Office Abuse of Process Pleading Requirements Summary Judgment +2 more

Source-derived case record

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 37 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hersi & Co Solicitors

Appellant/defendant

Ahmed Hersi

Appellant/defendant

The Lord Chancellor (as successor to the Legal Services Commission)

Respondent/claimant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Strike Out and Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does witness immunity bar the counterclaim and defence alleging wrongdoing by public officials?
  2. 2 Are the allegations of fraud, misfeasance, and deceit sufficiently particularised?
  3. 3 Is the counterclaim an abuse of process due to failure to pursue allegations in prior judicial review proceedings?

Ratio Decidendi

Witness immunity applies to the allegations in the counterclaim and defence, barring civil claims for evidence given in judicial review proceedings; allegations of fraud and misfeasance are not sufficiently particularised; the counterclaim constitutes an abuse of process as issues should have been litigated in the judicial review; summary judgment and strike out were properly granted.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Counterclaim and relevant paragraphs of Defence struck out
  • Summary judgment for the Lord Chancellor on the Counterclaim