Mann v Goldstein, 1968 2 All ER 769, 1 WLR 1091, 1968, (CH)
Citation:Mann v Goldstein, 1968 2 All ER 769, 1 WLR 1091, 1968, (CH)
Rule of thumb 1:IF a person raises a legal action, and does not have the money to pay for the legal expenses if they lose, can this be a ground to stop them raising it? Can an insolvency action be raised against? The answer to both questions is no – that is simply not how the legal system works in England.
Rule of thumb 2:Are you allowed to show venom & hostility in the legal process? Yes, you are allowed, provided that there is a reasonable foundation for the claim, and this is not an abuse of process.
Ratio-decidendi:
‘therefore, so far as material to our case, if the defendants are not creditors they are not entitled to present or advertise their petitions or apply for a winding up order; they have no locus standi, and their petitions are bound to fail even though the company be insolvent.... the only such ground relied upon... then the petitioner must be a creditor, and is no alternative to it...’, Ungoed Thomas J
'I come now to the allegation of bona fides and to abuse of process. It seems to me that to pursue a substantial claim in accordance with the procedure provided and in the normal manner, though with hostility or even venom and from some ulterior motive, such as the hope of compromise or some indirect advantage, is not an abuse of the process of the Court or acting mala fide but acting bona fide in accordance with process’, Ungoed Thomas J
Warning: This is not professional legal advice. This is not professional legal education advice. Please obtain professional guidance before embarking on any legal course of action. This is just an interpretation of a Judgment by persons of legal insight & varying levels of legal specialism, experience & expertise. Please read the Judgment yourself and form your own interpretation of it with professional assistance.