Avaricious claimants are facing disappointment in court, says Dominic Regan
The law reports are bursting with ambitious claims that did not achieve the desired outcome. This may be due to lack of merit in the claim, a cunning defendant, a mean judge or a cocktail of these elements.
In Hooper v Biddle [2006] EWHC 2995 (Ch) the claimant intimated to the defendant that litigation seeking £3.75m was in the pipeline. When formal particulars were served that had plummeted to £350,000. The downward spiral continued and C eventually accepted £38,000. Given the conduct of the claimant it was not to recover a penny in costs either.
Take the recent case of Lilley v Dmg Events Ltd [2014] EWHC 610 (IPEC), [2014] All ER (D) 123 (Mar). It may not surprise some readers to learn that the claimant was one of the growing band of litigants in person. He had written a number of articles for heady publications such as Adhesive Technology and Speciality Chemicals , both published by the defendant. The essence of the claim, which
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=961ae4db_1)
95ca96e3d47f4eff8d147c4f0df17c77.tmb-mov69x69.png?sfvrsn=3db5d86b_1)
