21/12/18
GIBBS v LAKESIDE DEVELOPMENTS LTD [2018] EWCA Civ 2874
A court order is binding and effective until set aside, even if the order was obtained by fraud. Therefore even if a possession order was liable to be set aside for non-service of proceedings, the tenant could not recover the proceeds of sale of the property on the basis of unjust enrichment and it was now too late for the tenant to seek to set the order aside.
20/12/18
CARR v FORMATION GROUP PLC [2018] EWHC 3575
Considers the level of detail required to be included in a claim form to stop time running for the purposes of limitation. Details of any relevant contract must be given for a claim in contract and details of the essential acts or omissions constituting alleged breaches of duty or negligence. If the essential elements are set out, it is not necessary to identify the legal basis of the claim by naming the cause of action and the court can consider relevant background. For a claim in dishonest assistance, it is necessary for the claim form to state that the defendant acted dishonestly.
20/12/18
ANTOINE v BARCLAYS BANK UK PLC [2018] EWCA Civ 2846
Although a fraudster had procured a court order for his registration as proprietor of registered land in reliance on forged documents, the court order had been valid until set aside. The fraudster’s registration as proprietor and registration of a legal charge which he granted before the court order was set aside, could not be regarded as a “mistake” justifying rectification of the register under schedule 4 of the Land Registration Act 2002, because both the order and the legal charge had been valid when the Registrar had made the entries.
14/12/18
HYPERAMA PLC v POULIS [2018] EWHC 3483 (QB)
Considers when injunctive relief may be granted on a without-notice application and principles to be applied in seeking a ‘door-step delivery up’ injunction for delivery up of items containing confidential information.