Per Rem Judicatam in UK Law

Leading Cases
  • Thoday v Thoday
    • Court of Appeal
    • 19 Dic 1963

    If in litigation upon one such cause of action any of such separate issues as to whether a particular condition has been fulfilled is determined by a Court of competent jurisdiction, either upon evidence or upon admission by a party to the litigation, neither party can, in subsequent litigation between one another upon any cause of action which depends upon the fulfilment of the identical condition, assert that the condition was fulfilled if the Court has in the first litigation determined that it was not, or deny that it was fulfilled if the Court in the first litigation determined that it was.

    The determination by a Court of competent jurisdiction of the existence or non-existence of a fact, the existence of which is not of itself a condition the fulfilment of which is necessary to the cause of action which is being litigated before that Court, but which is only relevant to proving the fulfilment of such a condition, does not estop at any rate per rem judicatam either party in subsequent litigation from asserting the existence or nonexistence of the same fact contrary to the determination of the first Court.

  • Hunter and Others v Chief Constable of West Midlands
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 17 Ene 1980

    On an appeal (which is a re-hearing) we have said that the fresh evidence must be such that, if given, it would probably have an important influence on the result of the case, though it need not be decisive, see Ladd v. Marshall (1954) 1 Weekly Law Reports at page 1491 and Skone v. Skone (1971) 1 Weekly Law Reports at page 815. But in order to avoid the effect of an estoppel (when there is no re-hearing) the fresh evidence must, I think, be decisive.

  • Mulkerrins v PricewaterhouseCoopers (A Firm)
    • House of Lords
    • 31 Jul 2003

    As I observed in Crown Estates Commissioners v Dorset County Council [1990] Ch 297, 305 res judicata (or to give it its full name estoppel per rem judicatam) is a form of estoppel which gives effect to the policy of the law that the parties to a judicial decision should not afterwards be allowed to re-litigate the same question, even though the decision may be wrong.

  • Arnold v National Westminster Bank Plc
    • House of Lords
    • 25 Abr 1991

    Cause of action estoppel arises where the cause of action in the later proceedings is identical to that in the earlier proceedings, the latter having been between the same parties or their privies and having involved the same subject matter. In such a case the bar is absolute in relation to all points decided unless fraud or collusion is alleged, such as to justify setting aside the earlier judgment.

    I consider that anyone not possessed of a strictly legalistic turn of mind would think it most unjust that a tenant should be faced with a succession of rent reviews over a period of over twenty years all proceeding upon a construction of his lease which is highly unfavourable to him and is generally regarded as erroneous. Estoppel per rem judicatam, whether cause of action estoppel or issue estoppel, is essentially concerned with preventing abuse of process.

  • Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd v Zodiac Seats UK Ltd (formerly known as Contour Aerospace Ltd)
    • Supreme Court
    • 03 Jul 2013

    Res judicata is a rule of substantive law, while abuse of process is a concept which informs the exercise of the court's procedural powers. In my view, they are distinct although overlapping legal principles with the common underlying purpose of limiting abusive and duplicative litigation. That purpose makes it necessary to qualify the absolute character of both cause of action estoppel and issue estoppel where the conduct is not abusive.

See all results
Books & Journal Articles
  • Estoppels Against Statutes
    • Núm. 29-1, Enero 1966
    • The Modern Law Review
    ...... the type of estoppel which is raised may be very relevant since the operation of an estoppel per rem judicatam is different from the operation of an estoppel arising by the acts of the parties. This latter expression is used here ......
    • Núm. 13-3, Julio 1950
    • The Modern Law Review
    ...... (2) The subject-mutter 01 the estoppel. To constitute an estoppel per rem judicatam, there must be identity of subject-matter. This comprises, as Bower explains, ' not only identity of subject-matter in a ......
  • A Public Law Issue?
    • Núm. 53-6, Noviembre 1990
    • The Modern Law Review
    ...... of the Court of Appeal to import into planning law the concept of issue estoppel, or more properly estoppel per rem judicatam. In Thrasyvoulou v Secretary of State for the Environment & Another,6 Hackney LBC had served an enforcement notice in 1982 ......
    • Núm. 24-3, Mayo 1961
    • The Modern Law Review
    ...... his first wife had been proved to be still alive was based on the alternative grounds of estoppel per rem judicatam and estoppel by conduct (or in pais, as it is referred to throughout the report). Phillimore J. had no difficulty in ......
See all results
Law Firm Commentaries
See all results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT