Samara v MBI & Partners UK Ltd (t/a M.B.I. International & Partners Co) & Ors [2016] EWHC 441 (QB) (04 March 2016)

Samara v MBI & Partners UK Ltd (t/a M.B.I. International & Partners Co) & Ors [2016] EWHC 441 (QB) (04 March 2016)

The court has no jurisdiction to entertain a second application under CPR 13.3 to set aside a default judgment after a final order and failed appeal. The principle of finality applies, and the only permissible routes are via appeal out of time or reopening under CPR 52.17, both of which require exceptional circumstances. No material change of circumstances or misstatement of facts was established. The application is an abuse of process and must be dismissed.

Citation
[2016] EWHC 441
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Samir Ramzi Samara; First Defendant/applicant: MBI & Partners UK Limited (t/a M. B. I. International & Partners Co); Second Defendant: AJWA RMTI CO (t/a AJWA Group for Food Industries)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 March 2016
Procedural Posture
Application to Set Aside Default Judgment / Second Application to Set Aside Default Judgment After Prior Dismissal and Failed Appeal
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Default Judgment, Setting Aside Judgment, Abuse of Process, Jurisdiction, Limitation, Fraud Allegation
Civil Procedure Employment Law Default Judgment Setting Aside Judgment Abuse of Process Jurisdiction Limitation Fraud Allegation

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Samir Ramzi Samara

Claimant/respondent

MBI & Partners UK Limited (t/a M. B. I. International & Partners Co)

First Defendant/applicant

AJWA RMTI CO (t/a AJWA Group for Food Industries)

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application to Set Aside Default Judgment / Second Application to Set Aside Default Judgment After Prior Dismissal and Failed Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court has jurisdiction to entertain a second application under CPR 13.3 to set aside default judgment after a final order and failed appeal
  2. 2 Whether the application constitutes an abuse of process
  3. 3 Whether there has been a material change of circumstances or misstatement of facts justifying reconsideration

Ratio Decidendi

The court has no jurisdiction to entertain a second application under CPR 13.3 to set aside a default judgment after a final order and failed appeal. The principle of finality applies, and the only permissible routes are via appeal out of time or reopening under CPR 52.17, both of which require exceptional circumstances. No material change of circumstances or misstatement of facts was established. The application is an abuse of process and must be dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application to set aside default judgment refused
  • Stay on enforcement lifted; claimant entitled to enforce judgment