Abuse of process appeal fails as parties were 'following direction of the court'

A City firm’s appeal against the dismissal of its abuse of process argument in long-running litigation that has been described as ‘a latter-day 'Bleak House' has itself been dismissed - as the parties were following the directions of the court.

The judgment in HE Winros Partnership v Global Energy Horizons Corporation focuses on an appeal by The Winros Partnership – formerly Rosenblatt Solicitors – of a decision rejecting an abuse of process argument in litigation over a detailed costs assessment. In the original case, Rosenblatt acted for environmental consultancy Global Energy against a former associate accused of misappropriating an opportunity to develop innovative technology. In 2015 the former associate was ordered to pay £3.6 million but his assets were subsequently valued at nil.

Ruling on Winros's application over abuse of process, Mr Justice Marcus Smith said he could see ‘no clearer case' of an abuse. The failure to deal with an objection at the right stage 'has unnecessarily protracted these proceedings by some years'.

Giving permission to appeal the process of abuse point, but dismissing the appeal, the judge said the explanation for the late-raising was that both parties 'were quite properly following the direction of the court'. 

He added: 'Courts expect their orders to be obeyed, and it would have been improper for Global Energy to shoehorn (or attempt to shoehorn) additional issues into what was expressly a preliminary issue hearing.'

A further hearing, challenging a ruling that the law firm’s 2012 bill was not a statute bill, has been listed for November.