WOL (London) LLP v Croydon Investments Limited & Ors (Costs)
[2024] EWHC 485 (TCC)
Robin Joseph Lee & Anor v National Westminster Bank PLC
15 July 2024
[2024] EWHC 1811 (Comm)
High Court
A business sued NatWest for messing up their bank account. The judge said some of the complaints were valid enough to go to trial, but others weren't because the business didn't provide enough evidence. The business has to provide more information before their claim can fully continue.
Key Facts
- •Robin Joseph Lee and Leeway Services Ltd (Claimants) sued National Westminster Bank Plc (Defendant) for various alleged breaches of contract and negligence.
- •The dispute stemmed from the Bank's handling of the Claimants' business account, including a name change reversal and alleged failure to investigate complaints.
- •The Claimants initially had a wide-ranging claim, but significantly narrowed it during the proceedings.
- •The key claims remaining focused on breach of a name change agreement, failure to investigate complaints, and negligent misstatement to credit reference agencies.
- •The Claimants claimed substantial losses, including daily losses from business interruption.
Legal Principles
Summary judgment can be granted if the claimant has no real prospect of succeeding and there is no other compelling reason for a trial.
CPR 24.2
A statement of case can be struck out if it discloses no reasonable grounds for bringing a claim or is an abuse of process.
CPR 3.4(2)
The test for permitting amendment of a statement of case is the same as for summary judgment: does the proposed new claim have a real prospect of success?
Slater & Gordon (UK) 1 Ltd v Watchstone Group plc [2019] EWHC 2371 (Comm)
A proposed amendment must be arguable, carry a degree of conviction, be coherent, properly particularised and supported by evidence.
White Book notes to CPR 17.3 at 17.3.6
In determining summary judgment applications, the court should not conduct a 'mini-trial'.
Easy Air Limited v Opal Telecom Limited [2009] EWHC 339 (Ch)
Outcomes
The Bank's application to strike out the claim was partially successful.
The court allowed some claims to proceed but struck out others due to lack of real prospect of success or insufficient particularity.
Permission granted to amend the Particulars of Claim, except for the Negligent Misstatement Claim and parts of the Name Change Agreement Claim.
Amendments were allowed where the claims had a real prospect of success, after considering the evidence and arguments.
The Claimants must provide further information and documents to support their daily loss claim by a specified date.
The court found the basis for the daily loss claim lacked particularity and needed further substantiation before it could proceed.
Mr Lee's claim for nominal damages was struck out.
The court found no basis for this claim.