Bilta (UK) Ltd & Ors v Tradition Financial Services Ltd [2021] EWCA Civ 221 (22 February 2021)

Bilta (UK) Ltd & Ors v Tradition Financial Services Ltd [2021] EWCA Civ 221 (22 February 2021)

The refusal to adjourn the trial, in circumstances where a key witness for the defence (Ms Mortimer) was unable to attend for bona fide medical reasons but was likely to be available if the trial were adjourned, rendered the trial unfair. The judge at first instance erred by balancing the inconvenience of adjournment against the importance of the witness, rather than focusing on whether the trial would be fair. The appeal was therefore allowed and the trial adjourned.

Citation
[2021] EWCA Civ 221
Parties
Claimants and Respondents: BILTA (UK) LTD (in liquidation) & Others; Defendant and Appellant: TRADITION FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 February 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (business and Property Courts, Financial List) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Adjournment of Trial, Fair Trial, Witness Unavailability, Dishonest Assistance, Fraudulent Trading, Case Management Discretion
Civil Procedure Insolvency Commercial Law Adjournment of Trial Fair Trial Witness Unavailability Dishonest Assistance Fraudulent Trading +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

BILTA (UK) LTD (in liquidation) & Others

Claimants and Respondents

TRADITION FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD

Defendant and Appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (business and Property Courts, Financial List) to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the refusal to adjourn the trial due to the unavailability of a key witness (Ms Mortimer) for bona fide medical reasons rendered the trial unfair
  2. 2 Whether the judge at first instance applied the correct legal principles in refusing the adjournment

Ratio Decidendi

The refusal to adjourn the trial, in circumstances where a key witness for the defence (Ms Mortimer) was unable to attend for bona fide medical reasons but was likely to be available if the trial were adjourned, rendered the trial unfair. The judge at first instance erred by balancing the inconvenience of adjournment against the importance of the witness, rather than focusing on whether the trial would be fair. The appeal was therefore allowed and the trial adjourned.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Trial adjourned to the first available date after 1 October 2021
  • Parties directed to write to the Chancellor of the High Court to consider expedition of the re-listed trial