CH-2025-000032 - [2025] EWHC 2988 (Ch)

Fecha: 13-Nov-2025

The Grounds of Appeal

The Grounds of Appeal

109.

There are four grounds of appeal as follows.

110.

Ground 1: “The Judge misdirected himself as to the legal test for striking out and/or summary judgment, in that:

(i)

he failed to consider whether the Claimant had a real prospect of success, and instead found that the Claimant “may well have” a real prospect of success; and

(ii)

he failed to consider whether the Claimant had a real prospect of succeeding on the claim, and instead found that that the Claimant may well have a real prospect of succeeding on one or more factual “points”.”

111.

Ground 2: “The Judge was wrong to assume that determining the Application would take as long as a trial of the claim, and to dismiss the Application on that basis.”

112.

Ground 3: “The Judge was wrong to reject the submission that there was no real prospect of success because the claim was barred by limitation, in that the primary limitation period had expired and:

(i)

the Claimant had no real prospect of succeeding on his pleaded case under section 32(1)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980 (deliberate concealment); and

(ii)

the Claimant had no real prospect of succeeding on his pleaded case under section 32(1)(c) of the Limitation Act 1980 (mistake).”

113.

Ground 4: “The Judge failed to determine whether the claim was an abuse of process (which it was), and thus failed to consider whether to strike it out on that basis.”

114.

Grounds 1 and 2, which amount to a submission that the Judge, as a matter of law, applied the wrong tests are not determinative. If I find that he applied the wrong legal test then it is agreed that I should myself apply the correct tests and reach a determination. If, on the other hand, the Judge applied the correct legal tests, then there still remains the issue of whether he applied those tests correctly and, in effect, I must consider what result flows from a correct legal application of the tests and whether it is different to that reached by the Judge.