The defendants appealed against two orders made in proceedings by the new government of Zambia alleging various tortious conspiracies by defendants with members of the former government.
Held: Appeals by the remaining two partners in the firm of solicitors were dismissed. The allegations were of dishonest assistance in connection with funds deposited in London in the names of other defendants from which payments had been made into the client accounts of the defendants and in part for their professional fees.
The Court of Appeal overturned the judge’s assessment of a witness he had listened to for several days.
Tuckey, Lloyd, Lawrence Collins LJJ
[2008] EWCA Civ 1007, [2008] Lloyd’s Rep FC 587, [2008] Lloyd’s Rep PN 21
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Zambia v Meer Care and Desai (A Firm) and others ChD 4-May-2007
. .
See Also – Zambia, Attorney General of Zambia for and on Behalf of v Meer Care and Desai (A Firm) and others ChD 7-Oct-2005
Reasons for dismissal of stay for certain defendants. . .
See Also – Zambia v Meer Care and Desai (A Firm) and others CA 7-Mar-2006
The appellant sought a stay of the action brought against them. The cliamants sought the return of goernment funds said to have been misappropriated. . .
See Also – Zambia, Attorney General v Meer Care and Desai (A Firm) and others ChD 22-May-2006
. .
Appeal from – Zambia v Meer Care and Desai (A Firm) and others ChD 4-May-2007
. .
Appeal from – Zambia v Meer Care and Desai (A Firm) and others (No. 2) ChD 29-Jun-2007
. .
See Also – Zambia v Meer Care and others (1415) CA 17-Dec-2007
. .
See Also – Zambia v Meer Care and others (1414) CA 17-Dec-2007
Two applications for permission to appeal . .
See Also – Zambia v Meer Care and Desai (A Firm) and others CA 9-Jul-2008
The claimant sought to allege fraud by its former president, and began proceedings to recover payments it said were fraudulent, including against a defendant Taylor in Switzerland, who now said that no letter before action or other explanation . .
Cited by:
Cited – Sibley and Co v Reachbyte Ltd and Another ChD 4-Nov-2008
Solicitors appealed against a costs order made refusing them payment of all of Leading and Junior counsel’s fees.
Held: The leading counsel involved had not provided anything like a detailed account of the time he had spent on what was a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 14 September 2021; Ref: scu.273156 br>