Section 21
2013
The cause of action alleged in 2013 is in misrepresentation. At paragraph 35 it is alleged that Prudential misled the Ombudsman by providing him with false and misleading information that the discrepancies between Mr Dewji’s plan and those of his wife and brothers was due to a “medical loading”. This is said to have been admitted to being incorrect in about August 2021 (see also paragraph 47(c)). This is said to have caused Mr Dewji to experience further delay and to have protracted losses. The losses identified (in paragraphs 36 and 37) are: (a) the difference between the underwriting charges between Mr Dewji’s plan and that of his younger brother up to March 2022; (b) the difference between the average of life cover charges for Mr Dewji’s brothers and that of Mr Dewji up to March 2022; and (c) the accumulation of the amounts in (a) and (b) at the respective fund unit growth rates over the period 2000-2024. The estimated loss is not less than £96,236.
Assuming the misrepresentation is made out, Mr Steadman says that the causal loss is not begun to be made out and that accordingly there is no prospect of success of the pleaded claim in misrepresentation (causal loss being an essential element of a cause of action in negligent misrepresentation). The losses pleaded are losses flowing from the loading being applied to the Plan from inception of the Plan. It is difficult to see how such losses can be causal loss flowing from a 2013 misrepresentation (which, in context, would require reasonable reliance by Mr Dewji on the misrepresentation in 2012/2013 causing him loss if a claim is to be established). No specific reliance on the representation is pleaded. Indeed, as from 2013, Mr Dewji knew that there was a loading to the Plan and continued to pay the increased premia. He says that he thought that the loading was medical (though asserted by him to be unjustified) but did nothing about this.
In my judgment, there is no real prospect of success regarding the claim in misrepresentation as pleaded.
- Heading
- Introduction
- The Procedural History
- The evidence generally
- The facts and the documents
- “Part 2: General Provisions” contains the following (among other provisions) “8. Law of the Plan Policies - England
- The complaint to the Irish Financial Services Ombudsman 2012
- Fresh complaints by Mr Dewji: June 2021 onwards
- The Re-amended Particulars of claim in this case
- Alleged breaches of Conduct of Business Rules
- The application before Mr Recorder Kelly KC
- The judgment of the Recorder
- The Grounds of Appeal
- Ground 1: discussion and determination
- Ground 2: discussion and determination
- Grounds 3 and 4
- When did the defendant know the essential relevant facts? Was it
- The Law Limitation
- Res judicata/abuse of process
- The taking out of the Policy in 2000
- Section 21
- Section 22
- Conclusion
- Conclusions
![CH-2025-000032 - [2025] EWHC 2988 (Ch)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_O3rEzCI.png)