Dhillon & Anor v Sandhu

Dhillon & Anor v Sandhu

The application to adduce fresh evidence was dismissed because the evidence could, with reasonable diligence, have been obtained and produced at the hearing before the Master. The evidence would not have had an important influence on the result, and its credibility was undermined by gaps and inconsistencies. The court found no justification to give the appellants a second opportunity to present their case.

Parties
Defendant/appellant: Jaswant Singh Dhillon; Defendant/appellant: Maidie Mohinder Kaur Dhillon; Claimant/respondent: Bagga Singh Sandhu
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 July 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Interlocutory Appeal Against Refusal of Relief From Sanctions and Application to Adduce Fresh Evidence
Outcome
Application to adduce fresh evidence dismissed
Legal Topics
Relief From Sanctions, Admission of Fresh Evidence on Appeal, Solicitor Negligence, Partnership Dissolution, Disclosure Obligations
Civil Procedure Partnership Law Relief From Sanctions Admission of Fresh Evidence on Appeal Solicitor Negligence Partnership Dissolution Disclosure Obligations

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jaswant Singh Dhillon

Defendant/appellant

Maidie Mohinder Kaur Dhillon

Defendant/appellant

Bagga Singh Sandhu

Claimant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Interlocutory Appeal Against Refusal of Relief From Sanctions and Application to Adduce Fresh Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellants should be granted permission to adduce fresh evidence on appeal
  2. 2 Whether the refusal of relief from sanctions was justified

Ratio Decidendi

The application to adduce fresh evidence was dismissed because the evidence could, with reasonable diligence, have been obtained and produced at the hearing before the Master. The evidence would not have had an important influence on the result, and its credibility was undermined by gaps and inconsistencies. The court found no justification to give the appellants a second opportunity to present their case.

Court Disposition

Application to adduce fresh evidence dismissed

Orders

  • Application to adduce fresh evidence refused
  • No relief from sanctions granted