Decoulos v Axel Springer Schweiz AG & Ors [2017] EWCA Civ 2632 (16 November 2017)

Decoulos v Axel Springer Schweiz AG & Ors [2017] EWCA Civ 2632 (16 November 2017)

The medical evidence provided by Ms Decoulos was not sufficiently specific or compelling to justify a further adjournment. The overriding objective favored proceeding with the substantive application to set aside the ECRO, given the history of delays and the written submissions already made by Ms Decoulos.

Citation
[2017] EWCA Civ 2632
Parties
Applicant: Decoulos; Respondents: Axel Springer Schweiz AG & Ors
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 November 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Oral Hearing of Application to Review Extended Civil Restraint Order
Outcome
Application for adjournment refused
Legal Topics
Extended Civil Restraint Order, Adjournment, Overriding Objective, Medical Evidence
Civil Procedure Extended Civil Restraint Order Adjournment Overriding Objective Medical Evidence

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Decoulos

Applicant

Axel Springer Schweiz AG & Ors

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Oral Hearing of Application to Review Extended Civil Restraint Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the extended civil restraint order (ECRO) against Ms Decoulos should be set aside
  2. 2 Whether the application for adjournment based on medical grounds should be granted

Ratio Decidendi

The medical evidence provided by Ms Decoulos was not sufficiently specific or compelling to justify a further adjournment. The overriding objective favored proceeding with the substantive application to set aside the ECRO, given the history of delays and the written submissions already made by Ms Decoulos.

Court Disposition

Application for adjournment refused

Orders

  • The application for adjournment is refused. The court will proceed to consider the substantive application regarding the ECRO.