Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd v John Forster Emmott

Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd v John Forster Emmott

Permission to amend the committal application is granted only in part, limited to sufficiently particularised allegations (paragraphs 1-14 excluding footnote (i), and paragraphs 15-18, and breach 1 of the freezing order allegations with specific excisions). All other amendments are refused for want of particularity, irrelevance, or reliance on matters outside the jurisdiction or period of the relevant orders. The claimant's application to set aside the previous order is certified as totally without merit. The committal application is struck out except as permitted above.

Parties
Claimant: Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd; Defendant: John Forster Emmott
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 November 2024
Procedural Posture
Contempt Application (committal Proceedings) / Interlocutory Applications: Strike Out and Permission to Amend
Outcome
Application to amend allowed in part; committal application otherwise struck out; claimant's set-aside application certified as totally without merit.
Legal Topics
Committal for Contempt, Procedural Compliance, Amendment of Pleadings, Particularisation of Allegations, Legal Aid, Abuse of Process
Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Committal for Contempt Procedural Compliance Amendment of Pleadings Particularisation of Allegations Legal Aid Abuse of Process

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd

Claimant

John Forster Emmott

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Contempt Application (committal Proceedings) / Interlocutory Applications: Strike Out and Permission to Amend

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's committal application should be struck out for procedural non-compliance
  2. 2 Whether permission should be granted to amend the committal application notice
  3. 3 Whether the claimant's application to set aside a previous order was totally without merit

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to amend the committal application is granted only in part, limited to sufficiently particularised allegations (paragraphs 1-14 excluding footnote (i), and paragraphs 15-18, and breach 1 of the freezing order allegations with specific excisions). All other amendments are refused for want of particularity, irrelevance, or reliance on matters outside the jurisdiction or period of the relevant orders. The claimant's application to set aside the previous order is certified as totally without merit. The committal application is struck out except as permitted above.

Court Disposition

Application to amend allowed in part; committal application otherwise struck out; claimant's set-aside application certified as totally without merit.

Orders

  • Permission to amend committal application granted in terms of paragraphs 1-14 (excluding footnote (i)), and paragraphs 15-18, and breach 1 of the freezing order allegations with specific excisions.
  • All other amendments refused; committal application struck out except as permitted.