Sobowale v Lendinvest Capital SARL [2024] EWHC 1829 (Ch) (18 July 2024)

Sobowale v Lendinvest Capital SARL [2024] EWHC 1829 (Ch) (18 July 2024)

The Deputy Master's refusal to permit remote attendance and to grant relief from sanctions was fair and did not breach Article 6 ECHR, as the defendant failed to provide sufficient evidence for his inability to attend, did not make adequate arrangements for remote participation, and was already debarred from defending due to non-compliance with an unless order; the appeal was therefore dismissed.

Citation
[2024] EWHC 1829 (Ch)
Parties
Appellant/defendant: Mr Junior Sobowale; Respondent/claimant: Lendinvest Capital S. A. R. L.
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 July 2024
Procedural Posture
Chancery Appeal / Appeal From Order of Deputy Master Henderson Dated 17 October 2023
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Relief From Sanctions, Remote Hearings, Personal Guarantee Enforcement, Disclosure Obligations, Right to Fair Trial
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Relief From Sanctions Remote Hearings Personal Guarantee Enforcement Disclosure Obligations Right to Fair Trial

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Junior Sobowale

Appellant/defendant

Lendinvest Capital S. A. R. L.

Respondent/claimant

Procedural Posture

Chancery Appeal / Appeal From Order of Deputy Master Henderson Dated 17 October 2023

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Deputy Master erred in refusing the defendant's application to attend and give evidence remotely
  2. 2 Whether the Deputy Master erred in refusing relief from sanctions to allow the defendant to rely on a late witness statement
  3. 3 Whether the refusal of remote attendance or relief from sanctions resulted in an unfair trial or breach of Article 6 ECHR

Ratio Decidendi

The Deputy Master's refusal to permit remote attendance and to grant relief from sanctions was fair and did not breach Article 6 ECHR, as the defendant failed to provide sufficient evidence for his inability to attend, did not make adequate arrangements for remote participation, and was already debarred from defending due to non-compliance with an unless order; the appeal was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed on all grounds
  • Costs to the respondent, subject to detailed assessment