Category Second set of proceedings

TWO PROCEDURAL POINTS: A SECOND ACTION IS NOT ALWAYS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS & A BANKRUPT CANNOT BRING PROCEEDINGS

The judgment of Master Bowles in Khan -v- Khan & Ambala Foods Limited [2015] EWHC 2625 (Ch) contains a reminder of two important procedural points. KEY POINTS (1) The issue of a second set of proceedings is potentially an abuse of proceedings. However the court will not always find it to be an abuse. (2) […]

THE ALDI PRINCIPLE AND SECOND ACTIONS: A STING IN THE TAIL

In Chamonix Private Equity LLP -v- Caledonia Investments plc [2015] EWHC 3290 (Comm) Mr Justice Knowles noted that, in the absence of prior notification, it was going to be difficult for a claimant to bring a second action against different parties. THE CASE The parties had settled an action on the morning of the hearing. […]

LITIGATE IN HASTE AND YOU WON’T NECESSARILY BE ALLOWED TO AMEND AT LEISURE: SU-LING -v- GOLMAN SACHS INTERNATIONAL

In the judgment today in  Quah Su-Ling -v- Goldman Sachs International [2015] EWHC Mrs Justice Carr DBE refused a claimant permission to amend her particulars of claim at a late stage. The judgment contains a succinct review of the law and principles relating to applications for late amendment and the application of “modern” principles of […]

SHOULD A SECOND ACTION BE STRUCK OUT AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS? AN ISSUE COMING TO THE COURT OF APPEAL SOON

There is an important note in the news section of Hardwicke Chambers website.  The Court of Appeal has granted permission to appeal in a case where the judge refused to strike out a second action issued after a first action was struck for failure to comply with the CPR. THE CASE In Padley -v- Anderselite […]

SECOND ACTION AGAINST A DIFFERENT DEFENDANT STRUCK OUT FOR ABUSE OF PROCESS: ALCOCK -v- PARK BUSINESS CENTRES LIMITED

Should a second action, issued because the first was struck out for some reason, be struck out?  I am grateful to Charles Bagot of Hardwicke Chambers for sending me a copy of the transcript of a decision by District Judge Baldwin in Alock -v- Park Business Centres Limited (Liverpool CC, 4th September 2014) where a […]

SECOND ACTION AFTER SETTLEMENT NOT AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: SECTION 33 APPLICATION ALLOWED: DOWDALL CONSIDERED IN DETAIL

The case of Dowdall -v- William Kenyon & Sons Ltd [2014] EWHC 2822 (QB) decided yesterday contains some important observations in relation to allegations of abuse of process; estoppel and section 33. THE FACTS Mr Dowdall has pleural mesotheliomia. In 2003 he settled an action against 8 employers. He brought a second action against three other […]

“MISAPPLICATION OF THE WORD SANCTION”: EXTENDING TIME ON A CONSENT ORDER IS NOT AN APPLICATION FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: SERVICE -v- BEACKON CONSIDERED

The case of Service Insurance Company Ltd -v- Beackon is briefly reported on Lawtel on the 26th June 2014.   It is a High Court decision by Andrews J where he rejected an appeal by an insurance company against an order extending time to comply with the terms of a consent order. THE FACTS The […]