Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 29 APRIL 2026

Did You Miss? Marshall & Edwards v Marshall & Marshall [2025]

Gatehouse Chambers
Gatehouse Chambers
Contributor

Gatehouse Chambers

Gatehouse Chambers is a leading commercial set with expertise spanning commercial dispute...

View firm profile
Explore more from Gatehouse Chambers

A Deputy Master's recent ruling examines when pre-action correspondence constitutes a formal admission under CPR 14 and the stringent requirements parties must meet to withdraw such admissions.

United KingdomLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

Marshall & Edwards v Marshall & Marshall [2025] EWHC 3376 (Ch) Deputy Master Linwood, High Court (ChD), 5 December 2025

Overview

A recent decision of Deputy Master Linwood concerns two linked applications in respect of an alleged pre‑action admission under CPR 14.

It provides a helpful summary of the principles the court will take into account when deciding (i) whether an admission has been made within the meaning of CPR 14.1 and (ii) if so, whether the Court ought to exercise its discretion to allow the admission to be withdrawn.

Background Facts

The Marshall family ran a successful retail business including a farm shop and garden centre in Hampshire. A partnership agreement was executed in 1997 between Peter Marshall and his children, Sharon (the Second Claimant) and Dean and Gary (the Defendants) (the “Agreement”). Peter died in January 2017. The First Claimant was Peter’s wife and the primary beneficiary under his will.

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.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from