Fairbridge Capital Ltd v Chandu Patel & Anor

Fairbridge Capital Ltd v Chandu Patel & Anor

The application for stay and ancillary relief was refused because the proposed payment plan was intended to further delay enforcement, lacked credible explanation for delay, and ancillary applications were without legal or factual merit.

Parties
Claimant: Fairbridge Capital Ltd; Defendant: Chandu Patel; Defendant: Kamini Patel
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 April 2026
Procedural Posture
Application / Ruling on Stay of Execution and Ancillary Relief
Outcome
application refused
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Possession Proceedings, Breathing Space Regulations, Slip Rule, Notice of Eviction
Civil Procedure Property Law Bankruptcy Stay of Execution Possession Proceedings Breathing Space Regulations Slip Rule Notice of Eviction

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 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fairbridge Capital Ltd

Claimant

Chandu Patel

Defendant

Kamini Patel

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application / Ruling on Stay of Execution and Ancillary Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to grant a stay of execution of a warrant for possession
  2. 2 Whether to permit amendment of DJ Worthington’s Order under the slip rule
  3. 3 Whether to dispense with 14 days’ notice of eviction

Ratio Decidendi

The application for stay and ancillary relief was refused because the proposed payment plan was intended to further delay enforcement, lacked credible explanation for delay, and ancillary applications were without legal or factual merit.

Court Disposition

application refused

Orders

  • Stay of execution lifted with immediate effect
  • Fairbridge at liberty to enforce possession order