William Andrew Tinkler v Iain George Ferguson
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Mr Justice Nicklin |
| Judgment Date | 08 June 2020 |
| Neutral Citation | [2020] EWHC 1467 (QB) |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division |
| Docket Number | Case No: QB-2019-006293 |
| Date | 08 June 2020 |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
17 cases
-
William Andrew Tinkler v Iain George Thomas Ferguson
...Nicol J and its addition could not come as a surprise to him. The Judge's decision 19 The Judge handed down his judgment on 8 June 2020: [2020] EWHC 1467 (QB). His decision on abuse of process is set out at [69 – 89] and on damage at [91 – 20 As to abuse of process, the Judge analysed the t......
-
Musst Holdings Ltd v Astra Asset Management UK Ltd
...being used appropriately, the parties need to raise the matter with the court. Reference should also be made to Tinkler v Ferguson [2020] EWHC 1467 (QB) at paras.50–51 which quoted from recent Court of Appeal authority that had confirmed the mandatory nature of the Aldi requirements: “A cl......
-
James Wilson v James Mendelsohn
...legitimate benefit proportionate to the likely costs and use of court procedures”; see the very helpful summary in Tinkler v Ferguson [2020] EWHC 1467 (QB) at [46]–[49]. The first strand has been largely supplanted by the introduction (in defamation claims at least) of the requirement to d......
-
FS v RS
...well-known principle in Henderson v Henderson (1843) 3 Hare 100, most recently analysed by Nicklin J in Tinkler v Ferguson and others [2020] EWHC 1467 (QB), [2020] 4 WLR 89, paras 34–38. There are also the interesting and suggestive observations of Carnwath LJ, as he then was, in Fitzhugh......
Request a trial to view additional results