header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
14 March 2014
Issue: 7598 / Categories: Case law , Law reports , In Court
printer mail-detail

Judgment—Default judgment—Setting aside judgment

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Samara v MBI & Partners UK Ltd and others [2014] EWHC 563 (QB), [2014] All ER (D) 48 (Mar)

Queen’s Bench Division, Silber J, 4 Mar 2014

The new regime that has implemented the Jackson proposals and altered the CPR applies to all the CPR, including applications to set aside default judgments under CPR Pt 13.

Sam Neaman (instructed by Ferguson Solicitors LLP) for the claimant. Derrick Dale QC and Rebecca Loveridge (instructed by Trowers & Hamlin LLP) for the first defendant. The second defendant did not appear and was not represented.

In March 2011, the claimant issued proceedings against the first defendant, claiming sums due to him under an employment contract. Neither an acknowledgement of service nor a defence was filed within the time limits prescribed by the CPR or at all. In September 2011, the master gave permission to enter judgment against the first defendant in default, which was entered in February 2012. The first defendant applied to set aside the default judgment under CPR 13.3. The

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

Read All
Sponsored by
London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll