Judgments

Broome & Wellington LP -v- David Greenstein [2009]

18/06/09

Court of Appeal uphold summary judgment and interim payment award in commercial guarantee case. Standard of proof for interim payment.

James Goudie QC and Julian Wilson (instructed by Zatman & Co. Manchester) represented the successful Claimants and Respondents in the Court of Appeal in Broome & Wellington LP -v- David Greenstein [2009] EWCA Civ. 589. In its judgment handed down on 18 June, the Court of Appeal considered the circumstances in practice where an enormous amount of commercial detail underpins a claim for a sum by way of summary judgment and interim payment. The Court dismissed the contention of the Defendants and Appellants that in those circumstances the Claimants must put that detail in evidence in order to meet the condition to be satisfied under CPR 25.7 (1) (c) that if the claim went to trial the claimant would obtain judgment for a substantial sum of money. The Court of Appeal stated that it amounts to satisfactory proof for a deponent to vouch for a sum where there is a lot of undisclosed underlying detail and that the detail itself only becomes necessary and appropriate if some sort of challenge is mounted. The example of claims on overdrafts is given. In the present case, the Judge below had not erred in finding that the Claimants were entitled to rely for the purposes of proof on a statement vouching for the amount of a judgment entered against the principal debtor by way of Consent Order even though the Defendant guarantors were not bound by the Consent Order.