Bailey & Ors v Glaxosmithkline (UK) Ltd [2016] EWHC 178 (QB) (04 February 2016)

Group action involving Seroxat (paroxetine), allegations of defect under Consumer Protection Act 1987.

“…the Defendant seeks an order or orders that would have the effect of bringing these proceedings to a permanent halt, the proceedings having effectively been stayed since January 2011. The Claimants wish to proceed to trial and seek appropriate orders and directions to that end. The trial had originally been fixed to commence on 1 February 2011…. with a time estimate of 3½ months…” (paragraph 2)

“…this is not a strike-out application or an application for summary judgment. I do not doubt that I could bring the proceedings to an end under my case management powers if I felt it right to do so, but I have to say it would be an unusual step to take, certainly in the context of the kind of information I have available at present. I do not consider that it is a step that I should take at this stage. That does not mean that it may not be a step that could be taken at a later stage nor does it mean that, if so advised, the Defendant may not apply for summary judgment at some stage. However, I wish to see how this case may develop in various stages before deciding whether it should be brought to a halt as an exercise in case management…” (paragraph 125)