Marchmont Investments Ltd. v BFO SA

Marchmont Investments Ltd. v BFO SA

The claimant did not exercise reasonable diligence in attempting to obtain Mr Fargialla's evidence before trial. There were several simple and reasonable steps that could have been taken to locate him, and the ease with which he was found after the trial demonstrates this. Therefore, the first limb of the Ladd v Marshall test was not satisfied, and the appeal to admit fresh evidence was dismissed.

Parties
Claimant/appellant: Marchmont Investments Limited; Defendant/respondent: BFO SA (Formerly Banque Française de L'Orient)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 June 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Admission of Fresh Evidence on Appeal, Mortgage Enforcement, Oral Agreements, Reasonable Diligence in Evidence Gathering
Civil Procedure Banking Law Admission of Fresh Evidence on Appeal Mortgage Enforcement Oral Agreements Reasonable Diligence in Evidence Gathering

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Marchmont Investments Limited

Claimant/appellant

BFO SA (Formerly Banque Française de L'Orient)

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether fresh evidence (witness statement of Mr Fargialla) should be admitted on appeal under the Ladd v Marshall test
  2. 2 Whether the claimant exercised reasonable diligence in attempting to obtain the evidence for trial

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant did not exercise reasonable diligence in attempting to obtain Mr Fargialla's evidence before trial. There were several simple and reasonable steps that could have been taken to locate him, and the ease with which he was found after the trial demonstrates this. Therefore, the first limb of the Ladd v Marshall test was not satisfied, and the appeal to admit fresh evidence was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.
  • Costs summarily assessed in the sum of £18,575 to be paid by the appellant.