- Cited — Rasal Khaimah Investment Authority v Farhad Azima & Ors 2023-05-15
“…e to a decision that was not properly open to the judge or was, in the view of the appeal court, plainly wrong: see Stuart v Goldberg Linde [[2008] EWCA Civ 2; [2008] 1 WLR 823] per Sir Anthony Clarke MR at [81]-[82] and Sedley LJ at [76].”…”
- Applied — Damian Warburton v The Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset Constabulary 2023-03-02
“…egotiations leading to a settlement, in its broad merits-based judgment as to whether a second action is abusive: in Stuart v Goldberg Linde [2008] EWCA Civ 2, [2008] 1 WLR 823 Lloyd LJ stressed at [57] that in applying that test it is necessary to proceed with care in relation to a contention that some aspect of a case must be disreg…”
- Cited — Anish Nambiar v Solitair Limited 2022-08-09
“…In Stuart v Goldberg & Ors [2008] EWCA Civ 2, [2008] 1 WLR 823, which was a case based on Henderson v Henderson abuse of process, this court held:…”
- Cited — Chowdhury Mueen-Uddin Secretary of State for the Home Department 2022-07-28
“…oceedings are an abuse of process is binary, the proceedings are either an abuse of process or they are not, compare Stuart v Goldberg Linde [2008] EWCA Civ 2; [2008] 1 WLR 823 at paragraph 24. However as the decision will involve balancing a number of factors, a court will only interfere if: the judge took into account immaterial fac…”
- Cited — Navigator Equities Limited & Anor. v Oleg Vladimirovich Deripaska 2021-11-30
“… conclusion which was impermissible, or (v) reached a decision that was plainly wrong (see Aldi Stores v WSP Group[2008] 1 WLR 748 at [16] and Stuart v Goldberg[2008] 1 WLR 823 (“Goldberg”) at [76] and [81]).…”
- Cited — Hussain v Vaswani & Ors 2020-09-18
“…] EWCA Civ 101 , at paras 35–36, Aldi Stores Ltd v WSP Group plc [2007] EWCA Civ 1260; [2008] 1 WLR 748, at para 16, Stuart v Goldberg Linde [2008] EWCA Civ 2; [2008] 1 WLR 823, at paras 76 and 81 and the very recent decision of this court in Liverpool Victoria Insurance Co Ltd v Zafar [2019] EWCA 392 (Civ), at para 44.…”
- Cited — Cable v Liverpool Victoria Insurance Co Ltd 2020-07-31
“…Goldberg Linde [2008] EWCA Civ 2, [2008] 1 WLR 823 at [65]. The striking out of a claim is a draconian remedy and one that should be seen as a last resort. In Summers, Lord Hope said:…”
- Cited — Lakatamia Shipping Company Ltd v Morimoto 2019-12-11
“…e in this court without the everyday experience of granting and refusing freezing injunctions unless it is plain that the judge is wrong: see Stuart v Goldberg [2008] 1 WLR 823 paragraph 76 per Sedley LJ and paragraph 81, Sir Anthony Clarke, Master of the Rolls.” (emphasis added)…”
- Cited — Harbour Castle Ltd v David Wilson Homes Ltd 2019-03-27
“…which there can be only one answer. These propositions are established by several decisions of this court, including Stuart v Goldberg Linde [2008] EWCA Civ 2, [2008] 1 WLR 823 and Atkas v Adepta [2010] EWCA Civ 1170, [2011] QB 894. If it is an abuse, the court has a discretion whether to strike it out, but, as Rix LJ said in Atkas v …”
- Followed — The British Council v Jeffery & Ors 2018-10-16
“…d have taken into account or made some error or was otherwise wrong: see Aldi Stores v WSP Stores Ltd [2008] 1 WLR 848 para 16 as followed in Stuart v Goldberg [2008] 1 WLR 823 para 81 per Sir Anthony Clarke MR, as now corrected by Lord Wilson in Re B at para. 44.…”
- Cited — Playboy Club London Ltd v Banca Nazionale Del Lavoro Spa 2018-09-12
“…in that way might well be an abuse of process: see Johnson v Gore-Wood at p. 31B per Lord Bingham, quoted above; and Stuart v Goldberg Linde [2008] EWCA Civ 2; [2008] 1 WLR 823, [77] (Sedley LJ) and [79] (Sir Anthony Clarke MR). But in this case, the fair inference is that the Club has proceeded to bring the deceit claim by reason of …”
- Cited — Playboy Club London Ltd v Banca Nazionale Del Lavoro Spa 2018-09-12
“…ts will not lightly shut out a party from pursuing a genuine claim, unless abuse of process can clearly be made out: Stuart v Goldberg Linde [2008] EWCA Civ 2; [2008] 1 WLR 823, at [65] per Lloyd LJ. “It will be a rare case where the litigation of an issue which has not previously been decided between the same parties or their privies…”