Moss & Ors v Martin & Anor [2022] EWHC 2788 (Comm) (04 November 2022)

Moss & Ors v Martin & Anor [2022] EWHC 2788 (Comm) (04 November 2022)

The court found no real prospect of success in the defendants' objections. Mr. Martin failed to show any breach of natural justice or public policy in the 2016 Judgment, having had notice, representation, and opportunity to defend. Ms. Bone submitted to the Texas court's jurisdiction by defending on the merits and counterclaiming, so section 33(1)(c) CJJA did not apply. Both judgments are enforceable in England.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 2788 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: David Tyler Moss; Claimant: Brandon Gabriel Keating; Claimant: Fidelissimus LLC; Defendant: Brian Martin; Defendant: Holly Susan Bone
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 November 2022
Procedural Posture
Application for Summary Judgment to Enforce Foreign Judgments / Judgment on Summary Judgment Application
Outcome
Judgment for the claimants; summary judgment granted enforcing both foreign judgments.
Legal Topics
Enforcement of Foreign Judgments, Summary Judgment, Jurisdiction, Natural Justice, Submission to Jurisdiction, Public Policy, Human Rights Act 1998
Private International Law Civil Procedure Enforcement of Judgments Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Summary Judgment Jurisdiction Natural Justice Submission to Jurisdiction +2 more

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 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Tyler Moss

Claimant

Brandon Gabriel Keating

Claimant

Fidelissimus LLC

Claimant

Brian Martin

Defendant

Holly Susan Bone

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Summary Judgment to Enforce Foreign Judgments / Judgment on Summary Judgment Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 2016 and 2022 Texas judgments are enforceable in England at common law
  2. 2 Whether the 2016 Judgment was obtained contrary to natural justice or public policy
  3. 3 Whether Ms. Bone submitted to the jurisdiction of the Texas court for the 2022 Judgment

Ratio Decidendi

The court found no real prospect of success in the defendants' objections. Mr. Martin failed to show any breach of natural justice or public policy in the 2016 Judgment, having had notice, representation, and opportunity to defend. Ms. Bone submitted to the Texas court's jurisdiction by defending on the merits and counterclaiming, so section 33(1)(c) CJJA did not apply. Both judgments are enforceable in England.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the claimants; summary judgment granted enforcing both foreign judgments.

Orders

  • Judgment in favour of the claimants for the sums awarded in the 2016 and 2022 Texas judgments.
  • Court to hear submissions on the precise form of order, costs, and any application for stay.