Mahajan v Waldman & Ors

Mahajan v Waldman & Ors

The applications were dismissed because the applicant failed to comply with mandatory procedural requirements, the orders under appeal were properly made within the discretion and jurisdiction of the judges, and the applicant's allegations of bias, conspiracy, and procedural unfairness were unfounded and unsupported by evidence.

Parties
Claimant/applicant: Ashok Mahajan; Defendants/respondents: Vivianne Bella Waldman & Others; Advocate to the Court: Adam Tolley
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 December 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Chancery Division Orders; Applications for Permission to Appeal and Review of Procedural Orders
Outcome
Applications dismissed
Legal Topics
Appeals, Practice Directions, Costs, Abuse of Process, Unfair Dismissal, Racial Discrimination, Fraud Allegations
Civil Procedure Bankruptcy Employment Law Appeals Practice Directions Costs Abuse of Process Unfair Dismissal +2 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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ashok Mahajan

Claimant/applicant

Vivianne Bella Waldman & Others

Defendants/respondents

Adam Tolley

Advocate to the Court

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Chancery Division Orders; Applications for Permission to Appeal and Review of Procedural Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Deputy Master was justified in striking out the appeal for non-compliance with Practice Direction requirements
  2. 2 Whether Patten J was correct in refusing to order a transcript at public expense and to require the court manager to answer queries
  3. 3 Whether Rimer J's procedural orders were properly made and whether there was jurisdiction to order costs against the Court Service

Ratio Decidendi

The applications were dismissed because the applicant failed to comply with mandatory procedural requirements, the orders under appeal were properly made within the discretion and jurisdiction of the judges, and the applicant's allegations of bias, conspiracy, and procedural unfairness were unfounded and unsupported by evidence.

Court Disposition

Applications dismissed

Orders

  • Applications dismissed as per the minute of order.