Wayne Murfet & Anor v Property Lending LLP & Anor
[2024] EWHC 2787 (Ch)
Sze Ming Yeung v Jeckz Investment Ltd & Ors
14 November 2024
[2024] EWCA Civ 1413
Court of Appeal
Someone borrowed money and didn't pay back. They said the agreement was unfair, but the court said they waited too long to complain and didn't have enough proof. The borrower had to pay back the money.
Key Facts
- •Respondents lent £700,000 to 888 OK Limited for property development, with Appellant providing personal guarantees.
- •An additional £34,000 was loaned later.
- •The property was sold on 15 June 2022, but the Respondents were not notified.
- •Respondents sought summary judgment for repayment of the loans.
- •Appellant admitted the guarantees but argued in separate Chancery proceedings that they were invalid due to undue influence.
- •The judge granted summary judgment for the Respondents.
Legal Principles
Summary judgment can be granted if the claim or defence has no real prospect of success and there is no other compelling reason for trial.
CPR 24.3
A realistic defence must carry some degree of conviction and be more than merely arguable.
Swain v Hillman [2001] 1 All ER 91; ED&F Man Liquid Products v Patel [2003] EWCA Civ 472
The court may consider whether a claim/defence has a realistic prospect of success considering factual basis, supporting material and sufficient pleaded facts.
Elite Property Holdings Ltd v Barclays Bank PLC [2019] EWCA Civ 204
The court should not conduct a mini-trial, but is not obliged to take everything at face value.
Swain v Hillman; ED&F Man Liquid Products v Patel
A judge considering summary judgment may look beyond pleadings and consider the possibility of amendment.
Mishcon De Reya LLP v RJI (Middle East) Ltd [2020] EWHC 1670 (QB)
Claims of undue influence should be raised early and supported by clear evidence.
Royal Bank of Scotland PLC v Etridge (No.2) [2001] UK HL 44
It is difficult to resile from an admission.
Cavell v Transport for London [2015] EWHC 2283 (QB); The Royal Automobile Club v Wright [2018] EWHC 913 (QB)
Outcomes
Appeal dismissed.
The judge was correct to grant summary judgment because the appellant's defence of undue influence lacked a realistic prospect of success.
Summary judgment granted to Respondents.
Appellant's undue influence claim was considered implausible, unsupported by evidence, and raised too late. The separate Chancery proceedings did not change this.
Similar Cases
Hope Capital 2 Limited v Stephen Michael Jones
[2024] EWHC 1308 (Ch)
Sub 20 Ltd v Royalton Investment Limited & Ors
[2024] EWHC 907 (Comm)
India Infrastructure Finance Company (UK) Limited v Reliance Naval & Engineering Limited & Ors
[2023] EWHC 1612 (KB)
Astute Capital Plc & Anor v Countrylarge 444 Limited & Ors
[2023] EWHC 1851 (Ch)