The sherriff sought relief against an interpleader by the debtor against whom execution had been issued. Glidewell J said: ‘First of all, what is the proper approach of the court to an application on behalf of the sheriff that the court should order ‘no action’ be brought? The court, in this sense, means the master in the first instance and, on appeal, the judge. In my view, one can properly draw the analogy of Order 14 proceedings in reverse, i.e. to be allowed to proceed with his action it is for the claimant to show that he has a real chance of defeating both defences available to the sheriff. If he shows this, a ‘no action’ order should not be made and the claimant should be allowed to continue with his action’. The test was what was ‘fairly arguable.’
Judges:
Glidewell J
Citations:
[1983] 1 WLR 1008
Litigation Practice
Updated: 02 May 2022; Ref: scu.416222