Evans v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions & Anor

Summary judgment may be granted where a claim has no real prospect of success and no other compelling reason requires a trial. A claim should not proceed merely because it raises issues of wider interest or has already generated extensive litigation.

The court may strike out proceedings as an abuse of process where their continuation would be a pointless waste of time, costs and resources, provided that the circumstances are examined scrupulously. A direct causal link is required for damages in a Francovich claim; a mere but for connection is insufficient. Costs incurred in pursuing the wrong defendant will not ordinarily satisfy that requirement.

The claimant was injured by an untraced driver and pursued compensation under the Untraced Drivers Agreement 1972. An arbitrator awarded damages, making a deduction for contributory negligence and ordering the claimant to pay her fee.

Following proceedings through the domestic courts and a reference to the European Court of Justice, the claimant brought a Francovich claim against the Secretary of State for alleged failure properly to implement Directive 84/5. He claimed damages for legal costs, contributory negligence, lost interest and other losses, together with declaratory relief.

The Secretary of State applied for summary judgment and/or strike-out under the Civil Procedure Rules. The central questions were whether any heads of loss had a real prospect of success and whether continuation of the remaining claim would constitute an abuse of process.

1. Application granted in part. The claimant had no real prospect of succeeding on the claims for the MIB litigation costs, the contributory-negligence deduction, the costs of setting aside the statutory demand, or the arbitrator’s fee and related losses. Those claims were summarily dismissed.
2. The claim for costs incurred in making the compensation claim and pursuing the arbitration was not shown to be fanciful. The assessment involved unresolved questions concerning equivalence, effectiveness, reasonable legal assistance and the appropriate costs regime. That issue therefore remained for trial.
3. The claim for interest also had a real prospect of success. The argument that the claimant would have been better off accepting the earlier offer depended on an untested inflation adjustment and did not justify summary judgment.
4. A Francovich claim requires an infringement of a rule intended to confer rights, a sufficiently serious breach and a direct causal link between the breach and the loss. The costs of suing the wrong party followed from the claimant’s litigation decision and its outcome, rather than directly from the alleged failure to implement the Directive.
5. The procedural reservation identified by the European Court of Justice required that the claimant be aware of matters which might be used against him and have an opportunity to comment. That requirement was satisfied. The claimant and his solicitors had the video and an opportunity to address the contributory-negligence and medical-evidence issues.
6. The general declaration sought served little purpose where damage was an essential element of the cause of action. Although the court had power under the Civil Procedure Rules to prevent abusive proceedings, the power required careful examination of all the circumstances. Here, continuation would be pointless because the remaining claim had no practical purpose beyond financial recovery, and the MIB’s open offer removed that practical benefit.
7. Judgment was accordingly entered for the First Defendant on the summary-judgment and abuse-of-process applications, subject to the surviving claims concerning legal fees and interest. Costs and consequential procedural matters were left for further submissions.

The judgment describes earlier arbitration, High Court and Court of Appeal proceedings, a petition to the House of Lords, and a reference to the European Court of Justice. It does not identify a separate appellate history for the present application.