The court had set aside an sequestration order made following a finding of contempt when the contempt order was incorrectly made. The intervener which had been prejudiced by the sequestration order now sought to argue that the sequestration order already set aside, had also been obtained irregularly.
Held: A party prejudiced by an irregularly made order should not be deprived of a right to apply for the withdrawal of any protection given to the party which had applied the irregularity made order. Where no issue of res judicata or abuse of process arose, that prejudiced party should be free to make the argument as to irregularity. However in the exceptional circumstances of this claim, such protection was not to be withdrawn.
Judges:
Lightman J
Citations:
[2007] EWHC 1743 (Ch), Times 23-Aug-2007
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal from – Tombstone Ltd v Raja and Another; Raja v Van Hoogstraten and others (No 9) CA 17-Dec-2008
The claimant complained of an irregularly obtained judgment. The defendant had obtained an amendment to a writ of sequestration in the course of a bitterly fought dispute bewteen the defendant and the owner of the claimant. The judge had found the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Litigation Practice
Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.258413