header-logo header-logo

30 September 2022 / Masood Ahmed
Issue: 7996 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , CPR
printer mail-detail

Absent without leave

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll