Badejo v Cranston [2019] EWHC 3343 (Ch) (19 November 2019)

Badejo v Cranston [2019] EWHC 3343 (Ch) (19 November 2019)

The judge below misdirected himself by failing to properly consider proportionality and by attributing undue weight to the loss of the trial date, which was not caused by the appellant's breach. The exercise of discretion was legally flawed. Relief from sanctions should be granted as justice is better served by allowing the action to proceed to trial; refusal would be disproportionate given the circumstances.

Citation
[2019] EWHC 3343 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant / Appellant: Mr Earl Patrick Badejo; Defendant / Respondent: Mr Adedayo Cranston
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Refusal of Relief From Sanctions
Outcome
Appeal allowed; relief from sanctions granted
Legal Topics
Relief From Sanctions, Automatic Strikeout, Trial Fee Payment, Proportionality, Exercise of Judicial Discretion
Civil Procedure Relief From Sanctions Automatic Strikeout Trial Fee Payment Proportionality Exercise of Judicial Discretion

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

Parties

Mr Earl Patrick Badejo

Claimant / Appellant

Mr Adedayo Cranston

Defendant / Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Refusal of Relief From Sanctions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether relief from sanctions should be granted for failure to pay trial fee
  2. 2 Whether refusal of relief was disproportionate
  3. 3 Whether loss of trial date should weigh against applicant

Ratio Decidendi

The judge below misdirected himself by failing to properly consider proportionality and by attributing undue weight to the loss of the trial date, which was not caused by the appellant's breach. The exercise of discretion was legally flawed. Relief from sanctions should be granted as justice is better served by allowing the action to proceed to trial; refusal would be disproportionate given the circumstances.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; relief from sanctions granted

Orders

  • Relief from sanctions granted to appellant
  • Action to proceed to trial