Rawding v Seaga UK Ltd

Rawding v Seaga UK Ltd

The Court of Appeal held that the new expert evidence from Mr Bel-Dean regarding the recoverability and analysis of backup tapes was credible, could not with reasonable diligence have been obtained for use at trial, and would have had a potentially decisive influence on the sole issue of the authenticity of the emails. The appeal was allowed, the judgment against Mr Rawding set aside, and the issue remitted to the trial judge for reconsideration in light of the new evidence.

Parties
Appellant/defendant: Jason Rawding; Respondent/claimant: Seaga UK Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 February 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court Judgment
Outcome
appeal allowed; judgment set aside; issue remitted for reconsideration
Legal Topics
Admission of Fresh Evidence, Personal Guarantee, Authenticity of Electronic Communications, Ladd V Marshall Principles
Civil Procedure Evidence Admission of Fresh Evidence Personal Guarantee Authenticity of Electronic Communications Ladd V Marshall Principles

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jason Rawding

Appellant/defendant

Seaga UK Limited

Respondent/claimant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in refusing to admit fresh evidence regarding the authenticity of emails alleged to constitute a personal guarantee
  2. 2 Whether the new evidence could have been obtained with reasonable diligence for use at trial
  3. 3 Whether the emails relied upon by Seaga were genuine

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that the new expert evidence from Mr Bel-Dean regarding the recoverability and analysis of backup tapes was credible, could not with reasonable diligence have been obtained for use at trial, and would have had a potentially decisive influence on the sole issue of the authenticity of the emails. The appeal was allowed, the judgment against Mr Rawding set aside, and the issue remitted to the trial judge for reconsideration in light of the new evidence.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; judgment set aside; issue remitted for reconsideration

Orders

  • Admission of Mr Bel-Dean’s reports as fresh evidence
  • Judgment against Mr Rawding set aside