Walton Family Estates Ltd & Ors v GID Services Ltd & Ors

Walton Family Estates Ltd & Ors v GID Services Ltd & Ors

There was no material change of circumstances or misstatement of facts to justify variation of the order. The evidence relied upon by JSS could have been presented earlier and was consciously withheld. The application was dismissed applying the principles in Tibbles v SIG PLC.

Parties
Claimant: Walton Family Estates Limited; Claimant: Airfield Farms Sulby Limited; Claimant: David Walton; Claimant: Elizabeth Walton; Claimant: John Walton; Claimant: Peter Walton; Defendant: GJD Services Limited; Defendant: GJD Aerotech Limited; Defendant: Kepler Aerospace Limited; Defendant: AGD Systems Corporation; Defendant: Tristar Air LLC; Defendant: Tempus Applied Solutions Holdings Inc; Defendant: ECJ Holdings Limited; Defendant: Japan Sky Services K.K.
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 February 2021
Procedural Posture
Commercial Claim / Post Judgment Application for Variation of Order
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Variation of Court Orders, Summary Judgment, Removal of Aircraft, Costs Assessment
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Variation of Court Orders Summary Judgment Removal of Aircraft Costs Assessment

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Walton Family Estates Limited

Claimant

Airfield Farms Sulby Limited

Claimant

David Walton

Claimant

Elizabeth Walton

Claimant

John Walton

Claimant

Peter Walton

Claimant

GJD Services Limited

Defendant

GJD Aerotech Limited

Defendant

Kepler Aerospace Limited

Defendant

AGD Systems Corporation

Defendant

Tristar Air LLC

Defendant

Tempus Applied Solutions Holdings Inc

Defendant

ECJ Holdings Limited

Defendant

Japan Sky Services K.K.

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Claim / Post Judgment Application for Variation of Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there is a material change of circumstances justifying variation of the removal order
  2. 2 Whether evidence adduced by the Eighth Defendant supports amendment of the order
  3. 3 Whether extension of time for removal or appeal should be granted

Ratio Decidendi

There was no material change of circumstances or misstatement of facts to justify variation of the order. The evidence relied upon by JSS could have been presented earlier and was consciously withheld. The application was dismissed applying the principles in Tibbles v SIG PLC.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application to vary order refused
  • Application for extension of time to remove aircraft refused