UCP Plc v Nectrus Limited

UCP Plc v Nectrus Limited

The judge's handling of the first CPR Part 52.30 application was affected by apparent bias due to repeated procedural unfairness, and he ought to have recused himself. Both the first Part 52.30 order and the second PTA decision must be set aside. The integrity of the process was critically undermined, and the tests for re-opening under CPR Part 52.30 were satisfied. Nectrus is granted permission to appeal on ground 2.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: UCP PLC; Defendant/applicant: Nectrus Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 July 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court; Application to Set Aside/refuse Permission to Appeal; Application to Re Open Refusal of Permission to Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; first Part 52.30 order and second PTA decision set aside; permission to appeal confirmed for Nectrus on ground 2.
Legal Topics
Recusal of Judges, Apparent Bias, Permission to Appeal, Reflective Loss, Re Opening Final Decisions, Procedural Fairness
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Recusal of Judges Apparent Bias Permission to Appeal Reflective Loss Re Opening Final Decisions Procedural Fairness

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

Parties

UCP PLC

Claimant/respondent

Nectrus Limited

Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court; Application to Set Aside/refuse Permission to Appeal; Application to Re Open Refusal of Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge's handling of the first CPR Part 52.30 application was affected by apparent bias
  2. 2 Whether the judge ought to have recused himself from making the first Part 52.30 decision
  3. 3 Whether the first Part 52.30 order and second PTA decision should be set aside

Ratio Decidendi

The judge's handling of the first CPR Part 52.30 application was affected by apparent bias due to repeated procedural unfairness, and he ought to have recused himself. Both the first Part 52.30 order and the second PTA decision must be set aside. The integrity of the process was critically undermined, and the tests for re-opening under CPR Part 52.30 were satisfied. Nectrus is granted permission to appeal on ground 2.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; first Part 52.30 order and second PTA decision set aside; permission to appeal confirmed for Nectrus on ground 2.

Orders

  • First Part 52.30 order set aside
  • Second PTA decision set aside