header-logo header-logo

03 November 2011
Issue: 7488 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Civil procedure

Obsession Hair and Day Spa Ltd v Hi-Lite Electrical Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 1148, [2011] All ER (D) 228 (Oct)

It was settled law that applications to set aside orders granting permission to appeal would have to clear a high hurdle to succeed. It was not enough to argue that such an order was made without knowledge of the full facts. At the heart of the jurisprudence was the notion of abuse of the process of the court.

To fail to disclose material information was to abuse the due process of the court and as a consequence to run the risk that the court would deprive the applicant of the fruits of the advantage wrongfully obtained. But there was no inexorable rule that an order granted without knowledge of the full facts had to be set aside. A sense of proportion always had to be observed. Too mechanistic a strike out would be an instrument of injustice.
 

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

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
An indemnity costs battle with a £20m gap could reopen an important question: what weight should an approved budget carry?
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
back-to-top-scroll