header-logo header-logo

Absent without leave

30 September 2022 / Masood Ahmed
Issue: 7996 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , CPR
printer mail-detail
Masood Ahmed examines the court’s approach to a party’s non-attendance at trial, & the high bar for applications to set aside the resulting judgment
  • The Court of Appeal’s judgment in Mabrouk v Murray provides helpful guidance on the approach the courts will take when considering applications under CPR 39.3 following the non-attendance of a party.
  • An application to set aside a judgment or order of a court must clearly satisfy all of the conditions in CPR 39.3(5), and the application must be supported with strong evidence and convincing arguments.

Where a party has failed to attend trial, a court may proceed with a trial in the absence of that party. However, the non-attending party may, pursuant to CPR 39.3(3), subsequently make an application to the court to set aside any judgment or order made against it. A court may only grant an application under CPR 39.3(3) if it is satisfied that each of the three limbs of CPR 39.3(5) have been met. CPR 39.3(5) provides that the applicant:

a. must have acted

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

Gilson Gray—Jeremy Davy

Gilson Gray—Jeremy Davy

Partner appointed as head of residential conveyancing for England

DR Solicitors—Paul Edels

DR Solicitors—Paul Edels

Specialist firm enhances corporate healthcare practice with partner appointment

NEWS
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School and the Frenkel Topping Group—AKA The insider—crowns Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP as his case of 2025 in his latest column for NLJ. The High Court’s decision—that non-authorised employees cannot conduct litigation, even under supervision—has sent shockwaves through the profession. Regan calls it the year’s defining moment for civil practitioners and reproduces a ‘cut-out-and-keep’ summary of key rulings from Mr Justice Sheldon
back-to-top-scroll