Chapple v Electrical Trades Union
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Date | 1961 |
| Year | 1961 |
| Court | Chancery Division |
Practice - Pleadings - Particulars - Pregnant negative - Negative allegation in statement of claim - Traverse in defence - Whether affirmative allegation to be implied from traverse of negative allegation - Whether plaintiff entitled to particulars. - Practice - Pleadings - Particulars - Not to be pleaded to.
In an action by a member of a trade union against the union and three of its officers for a declaration that the election of one of those officers had not been conducted in accordance with the union rules and was void, paragraph 7 of the statement of claim alleged that the defendants had failed to conduct the election in accordance with the rules and then set out the following particulars: (1) failing to order the correct number of voting papers and special envelopes; (2) ordering the printing of more voting papers and envelopes than were required for use in the election; (3) failing to check the number of voting papers and envelopes printed in order to ensure that there were no more than were required for use in the election; (4) failing to destroy any surplus voting papers and envelopes. Paragraph 8 alleged that in consequence of the breaches of the rules by the defendants the plaintiff had been deprived of his right to have the election conducted in accordance with the rules or in a fair and proper manner, and that he had suffered loss and damage. By paragraph 7 of their defence the defendants denied the allegations in paragraphs 7 and 8 of the statement of claim. On a summons by the plaintiff for further and better particulars of the defence under the following heads of paragraph 7 of the statement of claim: (1) of the number of voting papers and special envelopes ordered to be printed; (2) of the number of voting papers and envelopes required for use in the election; (3) of the checks alleged to have been carried out stating the time, date and place of and by whom the checks were carried out and their result and nature; and (4) of the number of voting papers and envelopes, if any, which the defendants had destroyed:—
Held, (1) that a defendant should not be required to plead to particulars even if those particulars could equally or more appropriately have been included in the body of the statement of claim and that, therefore, the application must be refused.
(2) That the traverse in paragraph 7 of the defence was a simple traverse of the negative allegation in paragraph 7 (1) to (4) of the statement of claim, and, as it was impossible to read into it any affirmative allegation beyond that necessarily implied from the traverse of that negative allegation, the application must be refused on that ground also.
PROCEDURE SUMMONS.
The plaintiff, Frank Joseph Chapple, a member of the Electrical Trades Union, issued a writ against the union, its general president, Frank Foulkes, the general secretary, Frank Leslie Haxell, and the assistant general secretary, Robert Graham McLennan, claiming, inter alia, declarations that the election in June 1960, of the defendant McLennan as assistant general secretary had not been conducted in accordance with the rules of the union, and that it was void.
The statement of claim stated the relevant rules, in particular rule 21 governing the conduct of elections, referred to the election in June 1960, in which the plaintiff and the defendant McLennan had been the two candidates, and continued by paragraph 7, which so far as material, read:
“In breach of the said rules the union and the second third and fourth-named defendants...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 7-day Trial
- Howard v Borneman
-
Howard v Borneman and Others
...of a positive to open the door to an application for particulars. As Pennycuick J. observed inChapple v. Electrical Trades Union [1961] 1 W.L.R. 1290, at page 1293, sometimes the court has come to the conclusion that the denial of the negative was pregnant and in others that it was not, but......
-
Patym Holdings Ltd. v. Michalakis,
...[1959] 1 Q.B. 297; [1959] 1 All E.R. 120 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 23]. Chapple v. Electrical Trades Union, [1961] 3 All E.R. 612; [1961] 1 W.L.R. 1290, refd to. [para. Adkins v. North Metropolitan Tramways Co. (1893), 63 L.J.Q.B. 361; 10 T.L.R. 173 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 23]. Tildesley v. H......
-
Wu Ching Sau v New World First Busservices Ltd
...for distinguishing the 3 different categories of traverse referred to above can be found in Chapple v Electrical Trades Union & ors [1961] 1 WLR 1290, 1293, per Pennycuick “…… a traverse is not to be regarded as pregnant with an affirmative merely on the ground that every traverse of a nega......
-
PAN ASIAN AFRICAN CO. LTD. V. NICON
...50 14.Lewis & Peat v. Akhimien (1976) 7 S.S. 157. 15.Attah v. Nnacho (1965) N.M.L.R. 28 at 31. 16. Chappel v. Electrical Trade Union (1961) 1 W.L.R. 1290. 17.Mandillas and Karaberis Ltd. v. Larnidi Apena (1969) 1 All N.L.R. 390. PAN ASIAN AFRICAN CO. LTD. V. NICON 18. Mansfield & Sons Ltd. ......