Momson v Azeez [2009] EWCA Civ 202 (18 March 2009)

Momson v Azeez [2009] EWCA Civ 202 (18 March 2009)

The refusal to grant relief from the debarring order was justified because Mr Azeez's non-compliance with disclosure orders made a fair trial impossible, the sanction was proportionate and served a legitimate aim, and the judge properly considered all relevant factors and the overriding objective.

Citation
[2009] EWCA Civ 202
Parties
Respondent/claimant: Folashade Rashida Momson; Appellant/defendant: Dauda Abiodun Azeez
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 March 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Second Appeal to Court of Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) and County Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; permission to appeal against Judge Marshall's order refused; stay on execution lifted.
Legal Topics
Relief From Sanctions, Disclosure Obligations, Constructive Trusts, Beneficial Interests in Property, Proportionality Under Article 6 ECHR
Civil Procedure Property Law Relief From Sanctions Disclosure Obligations Constructive Trusts Beneficial Interests in Property Proportionality Under Article 6 ECHR

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

Parties

Folashade Rashida Momson

Respondent/claimant

Dauda Abiodun Azeez

Appellant/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Second Appeal to Court of Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) and County Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the refusal to grant relief from a debarring order was justified under CPR Part 3.9
  2. 2 Whether the absence of disclosure prevented a fair trial
  3. 3 Whether the debarring order was proportionate under Article 6 ECHR

Ratio Decidendi

The refusal to grant relief from the debarring order was justified because Mr Azeez's non-compliance with disclosure orders made a fair trial impossible, the sanction was proportionate and served a legitimate aim, and the judge properly considered all relevant factors and the overriding objective.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; permission to appeal against Judge Marshall's order refused; stay on execution lifted.

Orders

  • Dismissal of appeal against Briggs J's order of 7 March 2008
  • Refusal of permission to appeal against Judge Marshall's order of 30 January 2007