ALDI Stores Ltd v WSP Group Plc & Ors

ALDI Stores Ltd v WSP Group Plc & Ors

Aldi's present action is an abuse of process because it seeks to litigate, for a second time, the same allegations against the same parties that could and should have been raised in the earlier proceedings. Allowing the action would unjustly harass the defendants, waste court resources, and is contrary to the efficient and just disposal of litigation. There were no special circumstances justifying Aldi's failure to join the applicants in the first action.

Parties
Claimant: Aldi Stores Limited; Defendant: WSP Group PLC; Defendant: WSP London Limited; Defendant: Aspinwall & Company Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 January 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Construction/professional Negligence / Application to Strike Out Claim as Abuse of Process; Judgment
Outcome
Claim struck out as abuse of process; action dismissed
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Res Judicata, Henderson V Henderson Doctrine, Strike Out Applications
Civil Procedure Construction Law Professional Negligence Abuse of Process Res Judicata Henderson V Henderson Doctrine Strike Out Applications

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 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Aldi Stores Limited

Claimant

WSP Group PLC

Defendant

WSP London Limited

Defendant

Aspinwall & Company Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Construction/professional Negligence / Application to Strike Out Claim as Abuse of Process; Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Aldi's claim against WSPG, WSPL, and Aspinwall constitutes an abuse of process under the Henderson v Henderson principle
  2. 2 Whether the claim should be struck out as it could and should have been brought in earlier proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

Aldi's present action is an abuse of process because it seeks to litigate, for a second time, the same allegations against the same parties that could and should have been raised in the earlier proceedings. Allowing the action would unjustly harass the defendants, waste court resources, and is contrary to the efficient and just disposal of litigation. There were no special circumstances justifying Aldi's failure to join the applicants in the first action.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out as abuse of process; action dismissed

Orders

  • Particulars of claim struck out
  • Action dismissed pursuant to r 3.4 of the CPR and the inherent jurisdiction of the court