30 Sept 2015
The court held that because there were strong grounds to suspect the plaintiff was incapacitated it was necessary to consider appointment of a litigation guardian before determining substantive relief; the plaintiff must be given an opportunity to respond in writing and the matter was listed for further consideration; the strike-out applications were not finally determined and costs were reserved.
10 Jun 2011
s60(5) bars adjudication only while a parallel court or arbitral proceeding subsists; it does not operate to extinguish an eligible tribunal claim after a prior court proceeding has been struck out; transfer and abandonment provisions applicable to active adjudications do not extend s60(5) to capture merely eligible dormant claims; res judicata, election or abuse of process may still bar a resumption but they did not apply on these facts; accordingly the appellants' claim remained eligible and the Tribunal's strike out was overturned.
9 Oct 2008
The original statement of claim filed 28 September 2004 together with subsequent amendments filed before 30 April 2005 pleaded the same four essential elements (duty, breach, causation, loss) arising from the same facts and thus constituted an action founded on simple contract within s 4(1)(a) Limitation Act 1950 concurrently with tort; the fifth amended pleading of 2 May 2006 did not introduce a fresh cause of action but merely refined particulars, so the claim was not statute-barred and the review application was dismissed.
30 Nov 2005
Because the causes of action pleaded against the defendant were statute-barred on the limitation point decided on 10 June 2005, the proceeding could not stand and, notwithstanding related appeals elsewhere, the appropriate order was dismissal and judgment for the defendant; costs were declined in the exercise of judicial discretion given the circumstances.