Zaman v Paradise UK LTD (2014) 11/12/2014

The Claimant appealed against the decision of a master striking out his claim against the respondent for abuse of process. The master had reached that decision because, amongst other reasons, the Claimant had failed to demonstrate an intention to bring the claim to a conclusion. The decision in Grovit v Doctor [1997] 1 WLR 640 was considered.

The Claimant claimed in respect of injuries sustained in the workplace in 2007. He obtained judgment on liability and the claim proceeded in respect of quantum only. The Defendant contended that the claim was exaggerated. In what became protracted proceedings, the Defendant twice applied for unless orders and proceedings were stayed on the basis that the Claimant had to apply to set aside the stay and comply with the directions made in the proceedings or his claim would be struck out. The Defendant then applied for strike out of the Claimant’s claim. At first instance, the master held that there had been extensive non-compliance on the part of the Claimant and struck out his claim as an abuse of process- on the basis that there had been a failure to take the necessary steps to bring the case to trial.

Judge Seymour QC upheld the master’s decision on appeal.

January 15, 2015 В· Editorial Team В· Comments Closed
Posted in: News