header-logo header-logo

14 December 2012
Issue: 7542 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Practice & procedure

Joint Stock Company VTB Bank v Valerjevich [2012] All ER (D) 29 (Dec)

It was settled law that the question in respect of an application for interim relief under s 25 of the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982 was whether it was expedient to grant the interim order sought. The question of whether it was a “good arguable case” was not a required test in an application under s 25 of the Act. The statutory test expressly provided how to approach such application, namely that the court could grant the order but might refuse it within s 25(2) of the Act. The court would however proceed with caution.

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

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde Co strengthens energy transition and construction offering with hire of Suriya Ashok

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit appoints rare dual-qualified lawyer to expand Anglo-French private wealth expertise

NEWS
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’

Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application

back-to-top-scroll