‘To set aside a judgment on the grounds of fraud, is it necessary to show that the evidence of fraud was unavailable at the trial and could not have been obtained with reasonablediligence? In May 2015, two High Court Judges gave totally contradictory answers to this question. ‘
Radcliffe Chambers, 15th June 2015
Source: www.radcliffechambers.com
‘The Claimant brought a claim in damages for injuries sustained in November 2014 when he fell into an uncovered man hole in the car park of a pub. Whilst the Defendant company operates anumber of pubs it alleged that at the time of the accident the pub was owned, operated and occupiedby a different company. The Defendant was asserting that it was not the correct company to pursue.’
Zenith Chambers, 27th July 2015
Source: www.zenithchambers.co.uk
Takhar v Gracefield Developments Ltd [2015] EWHC 1276 (Ch); [2015] WLR (D) 206
‘A judgment could be set aside for fraud even if the new evidence could reasonably have been obtained for the original trial.’
WLR Daily, 6th May 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘Denton and Delay: to what extent should delay impact upon an application to set aside judgment?’
Zenith PI, 13th May 2015
Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com
Howell v Lerwick Commercial Mortgage Corporation Ltd [2015] EWHC 1177 (Ch); [2015] WLR (D) 200
‘Where the debt in a statutory demand itself was not disputed but the debtor relied on a cross-claim which did not equal the debt but fell short of it by less than £750, the statutory demand was not necessarily to be set aside under the residual discretion in rule 6.5(4)(d) of the Insolvency Rules 1986.’
WLR Daily, 1st May 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘In order for a non-party to be “directly affected” by a judgment or order for the purpose of CPR r 40.9, it was necessary that some interest capable of recognition by the law was materially and adversely affected by the judgment or order or would be materially and adversely affected by the enforcement of the judgment or order.’
WLR Daily, 17th April 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘The High Court has overturned a judgment that granted leniency to a defendant who missed two deadlines for filing a document in a civil case.’
Law Society’s Gazette, 8th December 2014
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘The High Court has set aside an order made against a litigant after it emerged that his solicitor had duped him by conducting “fictitious” litigation that included faked judgments and telephone conferences involving the impersonation of his senior partner and of leading counsel.’
Legal Futures, 20th November 2014
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘Fireworks here from Collins J in making sure that Bank Mellat got some disclosure of information in its fight to discharge a financial restriction order against it.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 5th November 2014
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘Companies hoping to have a default judgment against them set aside must be sure to act quickly, an expert has said, after a recent court decision confirmed what courts must consider when considering an application.’
OUT-LAW.com, 22nd October 2014
Source: www.out-law.com
‘Conventionally, we’ve thought that a counterclaim would have to be raised before a possession order, or the complex and fraught option of applying to set aside the possession order would have to be followed, even assuming there was actually any basis for such an application. But there appears to be a solid argument based on Court of Appeal precedent to suggest otherwise.’
NearlyLegal, 9th April 2014
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
‘The landmark decision of the House of Lords Royal Bank of Scotland v Etridge (No 2) [2002] 2 AC 773
described the circumstances which render a lending transaction by a bank vulnerable to a challenge for undue influence and provided guidance to bankers as to which steps they would need to take in order to protect their lending, and any security to be taken, from challenge. Several cases decided since Etridgehave demonstrated the breadth of the scope for challenge where bankers have failed to follow the guidance, while others have highlighted some constraints on effective challenges based upon undue influence. Jeremy Cousins QC discussed this topic at a recent lecture of the Chancery Bar Association and shares his thought in this detailed ‘Insider’.’
11 Stone Buildings, January 2014
Source: www.11sb.com
‘Ignaoua, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWCA Civ 1498. A certificate issued by the Home Secretary under Section 2 C of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission Act 1997 (the “1997 Act”), as inserted by Section 15 of the Justice and Security Act 2013 (“the 2013 Act”), did not terminate existing judicial review proceedings in relation to an exclusion direction which had been certified.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 22nd November 2013
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
“What are the implications of a court setting aside a disposal made by a divorcing spouse to a third party? Anna Heenan & Ed Heaton report.”
New Law Journal, 7th June 2013
Source: www.newlawjournal.co.uk
“The Supreme Court’s decision on mistake and the flawed exercise of discretion by trustees, and the impact of the decision on professional advisers and their insurers.”
Full story (PDF)
4 New Square, 17th May 2013
Source: www.4newsquare.com
“Byron James, barrister, 14 Grays Inn Square considers the questions arising in relation to transactions set aside by s.37 MCA 1973 orders.”
Family Law Week, 9th May 2013
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
“A multi millionaire entrepreneur who gave his ex-wife £10.4 million in their
divorce settlement has defeated an attempt by her at the High Court to get a
bigger slice of his fortune.”
Daily Telegraph, 8th May 2013
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024