Casio Computer Company Ltd v Sayo & Ors [2001] EWCA Civ 2085 (13 December 2001)

Casio Computer Company Ltd v Sayo & Ors [2001] EWCA Civ 2085 (13 December 2001)

There was no good reason for the delay in seeking permission to appeal, and the merits of the case had already been determined against Mr. Tsuru by two judges. The interim payment and summary judgment orders were justified on the basis that Mr. Tsuru had no real prospect of defending the claim to the $3.33 million he retained. Consideration of resources was not raised at the appropriate time and did not warrant setting aside the orders.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 2085
Parties
Claimant: Casio Computer Company Limited; Defendants: Sayo & Ors.; Applicant/defendant: Mr. Tsuru
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 December 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal; Extension of Time
Outcome
Applications for permission to appeal and extension of time dismissed.
Legal Topics
Interim Payment Orders, Summary Judgment, Extension of Time, Default Judgment, Consideration of Defendant's Resources
Civil Procedure Contract Law Fraud Interim Payment Orders Summary Judgment Extension of Time Default Judgment Consideration of Defendant's Resources

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Casio Computer Company Limited

Claimant

Sayo & Ors.

Defendants

Mr. Tsuru

Applicant/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal; Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the interim payment order against Mr. Tsuru should be set aside or varied due to his alleged lack of resources
  2. 2 Whether there was justification for granting an extension of time to appeal the judgments of Neuberger J. and Rimer J.
  3. 3 Whether summary judgment was properly granted for the $3.33 million retained by Mr. Tsuru

Ratio Decidendi

There was no good reason for the delay in seeking permission to appeal, and the merits of the case had already been determined against Mr. Tsuru by two judges. The interim payment and summary judgment orders were justified on the basis that Mr. Tsuru had no real prospect of defending the claim to the $3.33 million he retained. Consideration of resources was not raised at the appropriate time and did not warrant setting aside the orders.

Court Disposition

Applications for permission to appeal and extension of time dismissed.

Orders

  • Applications dismissed.