Litigation: The claim game
Is a claim which could have - and arguably should have - been brought in earlier litigation an abuse of process? Johnson v Gore Wood  established that later actions which include claims that could have been included in earlier litigation may be an abuse of process. The House of Lords in Johnson considered that it was in the public interest that litigation should be final and that a litigant should not have to deal twice with the same matter. The court was, however, keen not to be dogmatic in its approach. Therefore, when assessing whether such claims did amount to an abuse, the courts were directed to take a broad, merit-based approach to account for the public and private interests involved (including a citizen's right of access to the court).
This premium content is reserved for
Legal Week Subscribers.
A PREMIUM SUBSCRIPTION PROVIDES:
- Trusted insight, news and analysis from the UK and across the globe
- Connections to senior business lawyers within the leading law firms and legal departments
- Unique access to ALM's unrivalled, market-leading reporting in the US and Asia and cutting-edge research, including Legal Week's UK Top 50 and Global 100 rankings
- The Legal Week Daily News Alert, Editor's Highlights, and Breaking News digital newsletters and more, plus a choice of over 70 ALM newsletters
- Optimized access on all of your devices: desktop, tablet and mobile
- Complete access to the site's full archive of more than 56,000 articles
Already have an account? Sign In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate enquiries, please contact Paul Reeves on Preeves@alm.com or call on +44 (0) 203 875 0651