Discovery Land Company LLC & Ors v Jirehouse & Ors

Discovery Land Company LLC & Ors v Jirehouse & Ors

The hearing must be adjourned to allow Mr Jones to apply for legal aid, as failure to do so would breach principles of fairness and the right to a fair hearing. Mr Jones cannot be compelled to be cross-examined on his affidavits, but if he chooses not to be cross-examined, the court may draw adverse inferences.

Parties
Claimant: Discovery Land Company, LLC; Claimant: Taymouth Castle DLC, LLC; Claimant: River Tay Castle LLP; Defendant: Jirehouse; Defendant: Jirehouse Partners LLP; Defendant: Jirehouse Trustees Limited; Defendant: Jirehouse Secretaries Limited; Defendant: Esquiline Asset Managers Limited; Defendant: Esquiline Finance Limited; Defendant: Stephen Jones; Defendant: John Clark
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 June 2019
Procedural Posture
Committal Application for Contempt of Court / Interlocutory Application—adjournment and Cross Examination Issues
Outcome
Application adjourned; no order compelling cross-examination of Mr Jones at this stage.
Legal Topics
Committal for Contempt, Right to Legal Aid, Cross Examination of Contemnor, Fair Hearing
Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Human Rights Committal for Contempt Right to Legal Aid Cross Examination of Contemnor Fair Hearing

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

Parties

Discovery Land Company, LLC

Claimant

Taymouth Castle DLC, LLC

Claimant

River Tay Castle LLP

Claimant

Jirehouse

Defendant

Jirehouse Partners LLP

Defendant

Jirehouse Trustees Limited

Defendant

Jirehouse Secretaries Limited

Defendant

Esquiline Asset Managers Limited

Defendant

Esquiline Finance Limited

Defendant

Stephen Jones

Defendant

John Clark

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Committal Application for Contempt of Court / Interlocutory Application—adjournment and Cross Examination Issues

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the committal application should be adjourned to allow the seventh defendant to apply for legal aid
  2. 2 Whether the seventh defendant can be compelled to be cross-examined on his affidavit evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The hearing must be adjourned to allow Mr Jones to apply for legal aid, as failure to do so would breach principles of fairness and the right to a fair hearing. Mr Jones cannot be compelled to be cross-examined on his affidavits, but if he chooses not to be cross-examined, the court may draw adverse inferences.

Court Disposition

Application adjourned; no order compelling cross-examination of Mr Jones at this stage.

Orders

  • Hearing adjourned to allow Mr Jones to apply for legal aid and obtain representation.
  • Expedition of the resumed hearing ordered.