Amsalem (t/a MRE Building Contractors) v Raivid & Anor

Amsalem (t/a MRE Building Contractors) v Raivid & Anor

There is no realistic prospect of the defendants paying the judgment debt within an extended period or by instalments. The court has no grounds to exercise its discretion to extend time for payment or otherwise interfere with the claimant's enforcement rights. The application is refused.

Parties
Claimant: Yoram Amsalem trading as MRE Building Contractors; Defendant: Hugh Mark Raivid; Defendant: Marsha Raivid
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 December 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil / Post Judgment Application for Extension of Time to Pay Judgment Debt
Outcome
application refused
Legal Topics
Extension of Time for Payment, Discretion to Order Instalments, Methods of Enforcement
Civil Procedure Enforcement of Judgments Extension of Time for Payment Discretion to Order Instalments Methods of Enforcement

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yoram Amsalem trading as MRE Building Contractors

Claimant

Hugh Mark Raivid

Defendant

Marsha Raivid

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Post Judgment Application for Extension of Time to Pay Judgment Debt

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should extend the 14-day period for payment of a money judgment under CPR 40.11
  2. 2 Whether the court should order payment by instalments or otherwise interfere with the claimant's enforcement rights

Ratio Decidendi

There is no realistic prospect of the defendants paying the judgment debt within an extended period or by instalments. The court has no grounds to exercise its discretion to extend time for payment or otherwise interfere with the claimant's enforcement rights. The application is refused.

Court Disposition

application refused

Orders

  • The application by the defendants to extend the 14-day period for payment of the judgment debt is refused.