Dhillon & Anor v Sandhu [2014] EWHC 3231 (Ch) (24 July 2014)

Dhillon & Anor v Sandhu [2014] EWHC 3231 (Ch) (24 July 2014)

The appellants were in breach of the consent order as compliance required making documents available for inspection within the specified time, not merely delivering them to solicitors. There was no material change of circumstances justifying variation of the order. Relief from sanctions was refused except to the limited extent of allowing the appellants to participate in the taking of the account, but not to adduce evidence, as the breach was serious, not promptly remedied, and no good reason was shown for non-compliance.

Citation
[2014] EWHC 3231 (Ch)
Parties
Defendant/appellant: Jaswant Singh Dhillon; Defendant/appellant: Maidie Mohinder Kaur Dhillon; Claimant/respondent: Bagga Singh Sandhu
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 July 2014
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Refusal of Relief From Sanctions and Related Orders
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; relief from sanctions granted to the limited extent of permitting participation in the taking of the account, but not to adduce evidence.
Legal Topics
Relief From Sanctions, Disclosure Obligations, Consent Orders, Case Management, Winding Up of Partnerships
Civil Procedure Partnership Law Relief From Sanctions Disclosure Obligations Consent Orders Case Management Winding Up of Partnerships

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

Parties

Jaswant Singh Dhillon

Defendant/appellant

Maidie Mohinder Kaur Dhillon

Defendant/appellant

Bagga Singh Sandhu

Claimant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Refusal of Relief From Sanctions and Related Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellants were in breach of the consent order of 18 September 2013
  2. 2 Whether the court should vary the consent order under CPR 3.1(7)
  3. 3 Whether relief from sanctions should be granted under CPR 3.9

Ratio Decidendi

The appellants were in breach of the consent order as compliance required making documents available for inspection within the specified time, not merely delivering them to solicitors. There was no material change of circumstances justifying variation of the order. Relief from sanctions was refused except to the limited extent of allowing the appellants to participate in the taking of the account, but not to adduce evidence, as the breach was serious, not promptly remedied, and no good reason was shown for non-compliance.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; relief from sanctions granted to the limited extent of permitting participation in the taking of the account, but not to adduce evidence.

Orders

  • Permission to appeal refused on breach and variation grounds.
  • Permission to appeal and appeal allowed to the extent of granting limited relief from sanctions: appellants may participate in the taking of the account but may not adduce evidence.