Mohamedalmas Adam v Safvan Ayub Adam
The court found that the alleged inconsistencies in the Claimant's description of the 2023 Agreement were not so serious as to render the case abusive or unintelligible; the pleading, though less detailed than desired, was coherent and not in breach of rules. The reference to repudiatory breach did not allege automatic dissolution and was not misleading. The requests for further information were not reasonably necessary or proportionate to enable the Defendant to prepare his case, and no court order was warranted.
Source excerpt
- Strike out applications
- Particulars of claim
- Oral agreements
- Repudiatory breach
- Further information requests
- Intellectual property in partnerships