Harrington & Charles Trading Company Limited & Ors v Jatin Rajnikant Mehta & Ors
[2023] EWHC 2420 (Ch)
Gloria Lewis v "The West Brom"
7 June 2023
[2023] EWHC 1361 (KB)
High Court
Several people filed similar, nonsensical lawsuits to delay eviction proceedings. The judge threw out all the lawsuits because they were a waste of time and an attempt to cheat the court system.
Key Facts
- •Multiple Part 8 claims were struck out in the High Court for being abusive and lacking merit.
- •Claims involved various mortgage disputes where claimants attempted to use High Court proceedings to delay or obstruct County Court possession proceedings.
- •Claimants did not appear at the High Court hearing.
- •The claims shared similar characteristics, suggesting a coordinated effort.
- •One individual, identified only as 'Beresford,' attempted to intervene in the hearing but was dismissed.
- •The claims relied on nonsensical legal arguments and lacked a recognizable cause of action.
- •Defendants successfully argued that the claims were an abuse of court process.
Legal Principles
The court may strike out a statement of case if it discloses no reasonable grounds for bringing the claim or is an abuse of the court's process.
CPR 3.4(2)(a) and (b)
Outcomes
All claims were struck out.
The claims were deemed abusive, lacked merit, and were used to delay County Court proceedings.
Interim injunction dismissed in Spellen v Santander.
Claimant failed to provide full and transparent information and the claim was without merit.
Application to strike out in Jorsling v Accord Mortgages granted.
Claim constituted a collateral attack on concluded County Court decisions and was abusive.