Helios Oryx Limited v Trustco Group Holdings Limited

Helios Oryx Limited v Trustco Group Holdings Limited

Relief from sanctions was refused because Trustco's default was serious and significant, there was no good reason for the default, Trustco failed to show it was unable to comply with the condition, and its conduct was dilatory and obstructive. The evidence did not support the claim that exchange control approval was impossible without a Namibian court order. The balance of prejudice and the need for finality in litigation justified refusal of relief. The court also lacked jurisdiction to vary the order under CPR 52.18(3).

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Helios Oryx Limited; Defendant/appellant: Trustco Group Holdings Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 February 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Relief From Sanctions After Dismissal of Appeal for Non Compliance With Unless Order
Outcome
Application for relief from sanctions refused; application to vary order refused; permission to appeal to Supreme Court refused.
Legal Topics
Relief From Sanctions, Unless Orders, Security for Costs, Appeal Procedure, Exchange Control Approval
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Relief From Sanctions Unless Orders Security for Costs Appeal Procedure Exchange Control Approval

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

Helios Oryx Limited

Claimant/respondent

Trustco Group Holdings Limited

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Relief From Sanctions After Dismissal of Appeal for Non Compliance With Unless Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether relief from sanctions should be granted following dismissal of appeal for non-compliance with unless order
  2. 2 Whether the appellant was unable to comply with the condition for security for costs due to exchange control restrictions
  3. 3 Whether the court has jurisdiction to vary the order imposing the condition after dismissal of the appeal

Ratio Decidendi

Relief from sanctions was refused because Trustco's default was serious and significant, there was no good reason for the default, Trustco failed to show it was unable to comply with the condition, and its conduct was dilatory and obstructive. The evidence did not support the claim that exchange control approval was impossible without a Namibian court order. The balance of prejudice and the need for finality in litigation justified refusal of relief. The court also lacked jurisdiction to vary the order under CPR 52.18(3).

Court Disposition

Application for relief from sanctions refused; application to vary order refused; permission to appeal to Supreme Court refused.

Orders

  • Relief from sanctions refused; appeal remains dismissed.
  • Application to vary the order refused.