Eves v Troy [2000] JRC 217 (03 November 2000)

Eves v Troy [2000] JRC 217 (03 November 2000)

It is not plain and obvious that the plaintiffs' claim is unsustainable; there is an arguable case that a contractual duty may have existed between the defendant and the plaintiffs personally, and the plaintiffs should be allowed to present their evidence at trial.

Citation
[2000] JRC 217
Parties
Plaintiffs: Mr and Mrs Eves; Defendant: Defendant (not named)
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
03 November 2000
Procedural Posture
Strike Out Application / Interlocutory
Outcome
Application to strike out dismissed
Legal Topics
Strike Out Applications, Locus Standi, Rule in Foss V. Harbottle, Contractual Duty of Care, Professional Negligence, Derivative Actions
Civil Procedure Company Law Professional Negligence Strike Out Applications Locus Standi Rule in Foss V. Harbottle Contractual Duty of Care Derivative Actions

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr and Mrs Eves

Plaintiffs

Defendant (not named)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Strike Out Application / Interlocutory

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs have locus standi to bring the proceedings against the defendant for alleged professional negligence
  2. 2 Whether the claim is frivolous, vexatious, or an abuse of process and should be struck out
  3. 3 Whether there is an arguable contractual duty owed by the defendant to the plaintiffs personally

Ratio Decidendi

It is not plain and obvious that the plaintiffs' claim is unsustainable; there is an arguable case that a contractual duty may have existed between the defendant and the plaintiffs personally, and the plaintiffs should be allowed to present their evidence at trial.

Court Disposition

Application to strike out dismissed

Orders

  • The defendant's application to strike out the amended order of justice is dismissed.