Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 08 JANUARY 2002

Summary Judgment In Fraud Claims – Update

United KingdomEmployment and HR
James George
James George

The Courts are still grappling with the summary judgment provisions of CPR Part 24. Lord Woolf’s judgment in Swain v. Hillman [2001] 1 All ER 91 remains an important source of guidance. The distinction between cases which have a "real" as opposed to "fanciful" prospect of success is frequently cited, as is the need to avoid conducting a "mini-trial" on an application for summary judgment. Claimants are therefore only able to obtain summary judgment in clear-cut cases where there is no factual dispute and the law is clear (e.g. Trustor AB v. Smallbone (No. 2) [2001] 3 All ER 987, a case of knowing receipt, and Ball v. Eden Project Ltd (The Times, 6 June 2001), concerning breach of fiduciary duty).

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from