Cook v Clapham and Ors [2023] JCA 005 (13 January 2023)

Cook v Clapham and Ors [2023] JCA 005 (13 January 2023)

Leave to appeal is refused because the proposed appeal has no real prospect of success; the Royal Court's refusal to allow amendment and grant of summary judgment was unexceptionable, as the Appellant's claims are unsupported by evidence, inadequately pleaded, and there is no triable issue.

Citation
[2023] JCA 005
Parties
Appellant: Richard Herbert Aster Maurice Cook; Respondent: Michael Henry Clapham; Respondent: Andrew David Le Cheminant; Respondent: Leslie Rufus Crapp
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
13 January 2023
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Amendment of Pleadings, Fraudulent Breach of Trust, Prescription, Exoneration Clause

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Richard Herbert Aster Maurice Cook

Appellant

Michael Henry Clapham

Respondent

Andrew David Le Cheminant

Respondent

Leslie Rufus Crapp

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted against refusal to amend Order of Justice and grant of summary judgment
  2. 2 Whether the Appellant's claim regarding assets in the Fine Art Trust has real prospects of success
  3. 3 Whether allegations of fraud and misappropriation are sufficiently particularised and supported by evidence

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal is refused because the proposed appeal has no real prospect of success; the Royal Court's refusal to allow amendment and grant of summary judgment was unexceptionable, as the Appellant's claims are unsupported by evidence, inadequately pleaded, and there is no triable issue.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused

Orders

  • Application for leave to appeal dismissed
  • No order as to costs