Goldsmith v O'Brien [2015] EWHC 510 (Ch) (29 January 2015)

Goldsmith v O'Brien [2015] EWHC 510 (Ch) (29 January 2015)

The applicant failed to provide full, frank, and clear evidence that enforcement would stifle the appeal or cause irremediable harm; therefore, the default position of refusing a stay applies.

Citation
[2015] EWHC 510 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Jonathan Michael Goldsmith; Defendant/appellant: O'Brien
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 January 2015
Procedural Posture
Application for Stay of Enforcement of Default Judgment / Post Judgment, Pending Appeal
Outcome
Application for stay dismissed
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Default Judgment, Appeal Procedure, Bankruptcy Risk, Costs Orders
Civil Procedure Enforcement of Judgments Stay of Execution Default Judgment Appeal Procedure Bankruptcy Risk Costs Orders

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

Parties

Jonathan Michael Goldsmith

Claimant/respondent

O'Brien

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Application for Stay of Enforcement of Default Judgment / Post Judgment, Pending Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a stay of enforcement of a default judgment and costs order should be granted pending appeal
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has provided sufficient evidence that enforcement would stifle the appeal or cause irremediable harm

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to provide full, frank, and clear evidence that enforcement would stifle the appeal or cause irremediable harm; therefore, the default position of refusing a stay applies.

Court Disposition

Application for stay dismissed

Orders

  • Refusal of stay of enforcement of default judgment for £325,000 plus interest and costs
  • Refusal of stay of costs order for £25,000