Elo Trustees Ltd v Bonhams 1793 Ltd & Anor [2023] EWCA Civ 664 (14 June 2023)

Elo Trustees Ltd v Bonhams 1793 Ltd & Anor [2023] EWCA Civ 664 (14 June 2023)

ETL's failures to comply with the Foxton Order were serious and significant, almost wholly unexplained, and there was no good reason for the defaults. The application for relief from sanctions was not made promptly. The sanctions imposed were proportionate and the court's discretion was properly exercised in refusing relief.

Citation
[2023] EWCA Civ 664
Parties
Claimant/appellant: ELO Trustees Limited; First Defendant/respondent: Bonhams 1793 Limited; Second Defendant/respondent: HNW Lending Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 June 2023
Procedural Posture
Appeal From High Court (queen's Bench Division) / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Relief From Sanctions, Compliance With Court Orders, Injunctions, Service of Claim Form, Promptness of Applications
Civil Procedure Relief From Sanctions Compliance With Court Orders Injunctions Service of Claim Form Promptness of Applications

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

Parties

ELO Trustees Limited

Claimant/appellant

Bonhams 1793 Limited

First Defendant/respondent

HNW Lending Limited

Second Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal From High Court (queen's Bench Division) / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether ETL should be granted relief from sanctions for failure to comply with the Foxton Order
  2. 2 Whether ETL's application for relief from sanctions was made promptly
  3. 3 Whether there was good reason for ETL's defaults

Ratio Decidendi

ETL's failures to comply with the Foxton Order were serious and significant, almost wholly unexplained, and there was no good reason for the defaults. The application for relief from sanctions was not made promptly. The sanctions imposed were proportionate and the court's discretion was properly exercised in refusing relief.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Relief from sanctions refused
  • Sanctions imposed by Foxton Order upheld