McCann v AIB [2001] JRC 15 (15 January 2001)

McCann v AIB [2001] JRC 15 (15 January 2001)

The appeal is dismissed because the proceedings constitute an abuse of process by seeking to re-litigate issues already settled, causing unfair prejudice to AIB, and the Order of Justice discloses no reasonable cause of action against AIB.

Citation
[2001] JRC 15
Parties
First Appellant: Daniel Benedict McCann; Second Appellant: Anthony Edwin Groves; Third Appellant: Johannes Lambertus De Geoij; Fourth Appellant: Theodora Clementina Helena De Goeij (née Bellman); Fifth Appellant: Clanbrassil Trust Company; Respondent: AIB Bank (C. I.) Limited
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
15 January 2001
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal Against Order Striking Out Order of Justice
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Contribution Between Tortfeasors, Limitation Periods, Settlement of Claims
Civil Procedure Tort Law Abuse of Process Contribution Between Tortfeasors Limitation Periods Settlement of Claims

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

Parties

Daniel Benedict McCann

First Appellant

Anthony Edwin Groves

Second Appellant

Johannes Lambertus De Geoij

Third Appellant

Theodora Clementina Helena De Goeij (née Bellman)

Fourth Appellant

Clanbrassil Trust Company

Fifth Appellant

AIB Bank (C. I.) Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal Against Order Striking Out Order of Justice

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the proceedings are an abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether the Order of Justice discloses a reasonable cause of action against AIB
  3. 3 Whether contribution can be sought from AIB under Article 5(1)(c) of the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Jersey) Law 1960

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the proceedings constitute an abuse of process by seeking to re-litigate issues already settled, causing unfair prejudice to AIB, and the Order of Justice discloses no reasonable cause of action against AIB.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Order of Justice struck out
  • No cause of action against AIB