Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd v CJSC KazSubton & Ors [2020] EWHC 2957 (QB) (12 November 2020)

Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd v CJSC KazSubton & Ors [2020] EWHC 2957 (QB) (12 November 2020)

The application to set aside the 26 March 2020 order and to reinstate the recusal application is dismissed because none of the circumstances relied upon by the Claimant would lead a fair-minded and informed observer to conclude there was a real possibility of bias by the judge. The allegations of bias are totally without merit.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 2957
Parties
Claimant/judgment Creditor: Michael Wilson & Partners Limited; Defendant/judgment Debtor: CJSC Kazsubton; Defendant/judgment Debtor: Kazphosphate LLP; Third Party: Solvay Solutions UK Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 November 2020
Procedural Posture
Application to Set Aside Order and Recusal Application / Post Judgment, Application to Set Aside and Recusal
Outcome
Application dismissed as totally without merit; recusal application remains dismissed.
Legal Topics
Recusal of Judge, Apparent Bias, Costs Orders, Third Party Debt Orders, Enforcement of Judgments
Civil Procedure Judicial Conduct Recusal of Judge Apparent Bias Costs Orders Third Party Debt Orders Enforcement of Judgments

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michael Wilson & Partners Limited

Claimant/judgment Creditor

CJSC Kazsubton

Defendant/judgment Debtor

Kazphosphate LLP

Defendant/judgment Debtor

Solvay Solutions UK Limited

Third Party

Procedural Posture

Application to Set Aside Order and Recusal Application / Post Judgment, Application to Set Aside and Recusal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the circumstances would lead a fair-minded and informed observer to conclude there was a real possibility of bias by the judge
  2. 2 Whether the order dated 26 March 2020 should be set aside
  3. 3 Whether the recusal application should be reinstated

Ratio Decidendi

The application to set aside the 26 March 2020 order and to reinstate the recusal application is dismissed because none of the circumstances relied upon by the Claimant would lead a fair-minded and informed observer to conclude there was a real possibility of bias by the judge. The allegations of bias are totally without merit.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed as totally without merit; recusal application remains dismissed.

Orders

  • The Claimant's application to set aside the 26 March 2020 order is dismissed.
  • The Claimant's application that the Master recuse himself remains dismissed.