The parties were embroiled in a company dispute with allegations of conduct prejudicial to minority shareholders. An application was now made for sanctions for a failure to comply with court directions.
Held: Unless and until a higher Court has said that the approach in Robert is no longer to be followed, it was binding and the court was obliged (i) to regard an in-time application for an extension of time as neither an application for relief from sanctions, nor as closely analogous to one, and (ii) to exercise the discretion under that rule by applying the overriding objective rather than the terms of CPR r 3.9.
Nugee J
[2014] EWHC 1165 (Ch)
Bailii
Civil Procedure Rules 3.9
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Sayers v Clarke Walker (A firm) CA 14-May-2002
In a case of any complexity, when an appeal court considered an application for leave to appeal which was filed out of time, it should have in mind the matters listed in the rules. It was not appropriate to use judge made checklists where one was . .
Cited – Raayan Al Iraq Co Ltd and Others v Trans Victory Marine Inc and Others ComC 23-Aug-2013
Application for extension of two days to service of particulars of claim. The defendants resisted saying that the court should apply sanctions against the claimant. The claimants applied for relief under rule 3.9.
Held: The new rules were . .
Cited – Mitchell MP v News Group Newspapers Ltd CA 27-Nov-2013
(Practice Note) The claimant brought defamation proceedings against the defendant newspaper. His solicitors had failed to file his costs budget as required, and the claimant now appealed against an order under the new Rule 3.9, restricting very . .
Cited – Webb Resolutions Ltd v E-Surv Ltd QBD 20-Jan-2014
A party in default seeking an out-of-time extension for making a renewed application for permission to appeal (under CPR r 52.3(5)) would have to satisfy the same tests as were applied to the default in Mitchell. . .
Cited – Summit Navigation Ltd and Another v Generali Romania Asigurare Reasigurare Sa Ardaf Sa and Another ComC 21-Feb-2014
The commercial court will not encourage time wasting procedural applications. Leggatt J summarised the principles that should be applied on an application for relief from sanctions: ‘i) On an application for relief from a sanction under CPR 3.9, it . .
Cited – Associated Electrical Industries Ltd v Alstom UK ComC 24-Feb-2014
The claimant was late in serving its particulars of claim. The defendant now requested the strike out of the claim for that default.
Held: The court applied the principles set out in Mitchell to refuse consent. . .
Cited – Donovan v Gwentoys Ltd HL 1990
The plaintiff, then a 16 year old girl slipped and fell whilst employed at the defendant’s factory. The limitation period expired on her 21st birthday. She commenced proceedings five and a half months after that date. The judge extended time under . .
Cited – Robert v Momentum Services Ltd CA 11-Feb-2003
The claimant appealed against an order refusing an extension of time for service of her particulars of claim. She had made the application before the period expired.
Held: The rules made a clear distinction between applications made before . .
Cited – Kagalovsky v Balmore Invest Ltd QBD 2014
Turner J said: ‘There is no reason to doubt that the ratio of this decision [ie Robert] remains good law but the emphasis which Dyson LJ (as he then was) placed in that case upon the importance of the ingredient of prejudice occasioned by the delay . .
Cited – Atrium Traing Services Ltd; Smailes and Another v McNally and Others ChD 27-Sep-2013
Liquidators of the company brought proceedings alleging fraudulent trading and trading whilst insolvent by its former directors. An application was made for an in-time application for an extension of time for disclosure.
Held: The Court should . .
Cited – O’Neill and Another v Phillips and Others; In re a Company (No 00709 of 1992) HL 20-May-1999
The House considered a petition by a holder of 25 of the 100 issued shares in the company against the majority shareholder. The petitioner, an ex-employee, had been taken into management and then given his shares and permitted to take 50% of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Litigation Practice
Updated: 11 November 2021; Ref: scu.523776
