Avonwick Holdings Ltd v Azitio Holdings & Ors

Avonwick Holdings Ltd v Azitio Holdings & Ors

The application for adjournment was dismissed because there was no material change of circumstances since the previous adjournment, the prejudice to other parties and the administration of justice from further delay outweighed the potential prejudice to Mr Mkrtchan, and the parties could be ready for trial with a revised pre-trial timetable.

Parties
Claimant: Avonwick Holdings Limited; Defendant: Azitio Holdings Limited; Defendant: Dargamo Holdings Limited; Defendant: Oleg Mkrtchan; Defendant: Sergiy Taruta; Third Party: Vitali Gaiduk; Third Party: Roselink Limited; Third Party: Prandicle Limited; Third Party: Olena Gaiduk; Third Party: Gastly Holdings Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 February 2019
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Civil Proceedings / Interlocutory Application for Adjournment of Trial
Outcome
Application for adjournment dismissed
Legal Topics
Adjournment of Trial, Case Management, Pre Trial Detention, Readiness for Trial
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Adjournment of Trial Case Management Pre Trial Detention Readiness for 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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Avonwick Holdings Limited

Claimant

Azitio Holdings Limited

Defendant

Dargamo Holdings Limited

Defendant

Oleg Mkrtchan

Defendant

Sergiy Taruta

Defendant

Vitali Gaiduk

Third Party

Roselink Limited

Third Party

Prandicle Limited

Third Party

Olena Gaiduk

Third Party

Gastly Holdings Limited

Third Party

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Civil Proceedings / Interlocutory Application for Adjournment of Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial should be adjourned due to the pre-trial detention of Mr Mkrtchan
  2. 2 Whether the trial should be adjourned due to unreadiness for trial in October 2019

Ratio Decidendi

The application for adjournment was dismissed because there was no material change of circumstances since the previous adjournment, the prejudice to other parties and the administration of justice from further delay outweighed the potential prejudice to Mr Mkrtchan, and the parties could be ready for trial with a revised pre-trial timetable.

Court Disposition

Application for adjournment dismissed

Orders

  • Primary witness statements to be exchanged by 1 March 2019
  • Reply witness statements, if any, to be exchanged by 22 March 2019