The plaintiff had failed to comply with an ‘unless’ order.
Held: It was a clear requirement that the party should be known to have been aware of the content of an unless order. The order as drafted was fatally irregular and should be set aside.
Citations:
[1996] EWCA Civ 881
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Hitachi Sales UK Limited v Matsui Osk Lines Ltd CA 1986
The court considered the effect of non-compliance with the following order: ‘Unless the Defendants do serve within 14 days the Further and Better particulars of the Points of Defence . . the Points of Defence be struck out, and the Plaintiffs be at . .
Cited – White v Weston CA 1968
A county court summons was purportedly served on the defendant at a previous address and he did not receive it.
Held: The court treated the case as one in which the defendant had not been duly served with process. Judgment was given against . .
Cited – Practice Note CA 1986
The Court of Appeal emphasised that an order that prescribes unpleasant consequences unless a particular act is done is an order that ‘requires a person to do an act’ within the meaning of RSC Ord. 42,r.2.
(2) Rule 2(1) requires that (subject . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Litigation Practice
Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.140748
