Denny Taylor & Ors. v David Evans & Ors.
[2023] EWHC 935 (KB)
Denny Taylor & Ors v David Evans (as representative of the Labour Party)
23 June 2023
[2023] EWHC 2490 (KB)
High Court
A group sued the Labour Party for leaking a report about anti-Semitism. The judge said some parts of the case belong in a lower court and split the rest to save money. The people who sued had to pay some of the legal bills because they started the case in the wrong court.
Key Facts
- •Claimants brought a High Court claim against David Evans (representing the Labour Party) and named third parties concerning the leaking of a draft report on anti-Semitism within the Labour Party.
- •The claim included breaches of data protection law, breach of confidence, and vicarious liability.
- •The claimants also included a claim under the Equality Act 2010, for which the County Court has exclusive jurisdiction.
- •The defendant's Part 20 claim against the third parties alleged a conspiracy to undermine Sir Keir Starmer.
- •The total value of the claims was estimated at over £3.5 million.
- •The claims involved numerous witnesses and significant potential costs (over £4 million).
Legal Principles
County Court has exclusive jurisdiction over Equality Act 2010 claims relating to associations.
Equality Act 2010, sections 113 and 114
High Court has power to transfer proceedings to County Court if an enactment requires it.
County Courts Act 1984, section 40
High Court has power to transfer proceedings from County Court to High Court if desirable.
County Courts Act 1984, section 41
Court must consider all circumstances, including proportionality, when making cost orders.
Civil Procedure Rules, rule 44.2
Overriding objective of dealing with cases justly and at proportionate cost.
Civil Procedure Rules, rule 1.1
Court must actively manage cases to further the overriding objective.
Civil Procedure Rules, rule 1.4
Court's general powers of case management.
Civil Procedure Rules, rule 3.1
Considerations for permitting or dismissing additional claims (Part 20 claims).
Civil Procedure Rules, rule 20.9
Matters to which the court must have regard when considering transfer of proceedings.
Civil Procedure Rules, rule 30.3
If a defendant fails to make a CPR Part 11 application, they are treated as having accepted the court's jurisdiction.
Civil Procedure Rules, rule 11
Outcomes
Transferred the Equality Act 2010 claim to the County Court.
The County Court has exclusive jurisdiction over such claims; the High Court lacks jurisdiction and is obligated to transfer under section 40(1) of the County Courts Act 1984.
Ordered a split trial of liability and quantum for the remaining High Court claims.
This approach balances cost savings with the need to avoid inconsistent outcomes and undue complexity. It allows for a more efficient and focused approach to the intertwined issues of liability and damages.
Ordered costs in the case for the defendant and third parties against the claimants, with a partial apportionment concerning the Equality Act 2010 claim.
The claimants' conduct in initiating the Equality Act claim in the wrong court necessitated additional hearings and legal costs, despite the defendant's initial failure to pursue a CPR Part 11 application. The third parties were similarly affected by the claimants' actions.
Similar Cases
Tanka Thakali & Ors v Navin Kumar Gauchan & Anor
[2023] EWHC 3032 (SCCO)
Stonegate Farmers Limited & Ors v Michael Richard John Kent & Ors
[2024] EWHC 3051 (Ch)
ABC & Ors v Derbyshire County Council & Ors (No. 2: Costs)
[2023] EWHC 1337 (KB)
ISG Retail Limited v FK Construction Limited (Consequential matters)
[2024] EWHC 1159 (TCC)