Watson v Evershed LLP [2015] EWHC 2078 (QB) (17 July 2015)

No claim form has been issued, no notice given, and no urgency demonstrated; the application is totally without merit and cannot result in any order. Allegations of fraud require a separate action, not an injunction or appeal. Extension of time for appeal is not granted as applicant has sufficient time and knowledge to pursue appeal properly.

Citation: [2015] EWHC 2078
Parties: Proposed Claimant: Elizabeth Watson; Proposed Claimant: Craig Watson; Proposed Defendant: Eversheds LLP; Proposed Defendant: Paul Mitchell, Hailsham Chambers
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 17 July 2015
Procedural Posture: Interim Injunction Application (pre Action) / Pre Issue, Oral Hearing
Outcome: application refused
Legal Topics: Interim Injunctions, Fraud on the Court, Possession Orders, Appeals, Without Notice Applications

Civil Procedure Property Law Interim Injunctions Fraud on the Court Possession Orders Appeals Without Notice Applications

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

Elizabeth Watson

Proposed Claimant

Craig Watson

Proposed Claimant

Eversheds LLP

Proposed Defendant

Paul Mitchell, Hailsham Chambers

Proposed Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interim Injunction Application (pre Action) / Pre Issue, Oral Hearing

Legal Issues

1 Whether the court can grant an interim injunction without a claim form or notice to defendants
2 Whether there is urgency or justification for a without notice application
3 Whether allegations of fraud on the court require a separate action

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

application refused