Having reviewed your scenario, I believe that the issues forming the basis of your proposed Application are more appropriately addressed at Trial rather than an Interim Application as it would be tantamount to “Trial by Application”, which the Court is unlikely to grant. Interim Applications are largely to resolve technical points, such as compliance with the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 in meeting court deadlines and drafting Statements of Case correctly.
Had your opponent’s Particulars of Claim not disclosed any cause of action for bringing the claim (such as a Breach of Contract or a Breach of Tortious Duty of Care) or their Defence disclosed no reasonable grounds for defending your claim (such as a “bare denial” or “holding defence” which did not state their reasons for defending the Claim), then I would recommend making an Application for the other party’s Statement of Case to be Struck Out and for Summary Judgment in your favour on the grounds that the other party’s case has no real prospect of success, is an abuse of process and there is no other compelling reason for the court and the parties to go to the time and expense of disposing of the matter at a fully-contested Trial.
In your case, it appears that your objections to the other party’s Statement of Case go to the substantive issues of their Statement of Case. There is a genuine disagreement over the facts of the case as well as the honesty and credibility of the other party, which must be addressed at a fully contested hearing and is not appropriate to issue an Interim Application to determine these issues.
Finally, if you lose an Interim Application, you may be ordered to pay the other party’s costs of defending the Application.
Therefore, on balance, I do not recommend that you proceed with your proposed Interim Application.