MICHAEL WILSON & PARTNERS LIMITED v JOHN FORSTER EMMOTT

MICHAEL WILSON & PARTNERS LIMITED v JOHN FORSTER EMMOTT

Adjournment refused as hearing was properly listed and issues are not of substantive importance; public resources and access to justice outweigh counsel's convenience. Terms of order settled to reflect previous rulings, including reduction of freezing order subject to defendant's response. Service by email permitted for notice to third party. Permission granted for third party to apply to be joined, with parties not opposing. Extension granted for payment of costs, with liberty to apply if unpaid.

Parties
Claimant: Michael Wilson & Partners Limited; Defendant: John Forster Emmott
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 January 2020
Procedural Posture
Application / Ruling on Adjournment and Settlement of Order
Outcome
application for adjournment refused; terms of order settled; extension for payment of costs granted
Legal Topics
Adjournment, Freezing Order, Appointment of Receiver, Costs, Service of Proceedings
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Adjournment Freezing Order Appointment of Receiver Costs Service of Proceedings

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 5 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michael Wilson & Partners Limited

Claimant

John Forster Emmott

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application / Ruling on Adjournment and Settlement of Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 whether to adjourn the hearing for counsel's convenience
  2. 2 settlement of terms of order following previous hearing
  3. 3 determination of amount recoverable under quantum award and scope of freezing order

Ratio Decidendi

Adjournment refused as hearing was properly listed and issues are not of substantive importance; public resources and access to justice outweigh counsel's convenience. Terms of order settled to reflect previous rulings, including reduction of freezing order subject to defendant's response. Service by email permitted for notice to third party. Permission granted for third party to apply to be joined, with parties not opposing. Extension granted for payment of costs, with liberty to apply if unpaid.

Court Disposition

application for adjournment refused; terms of order settled; extension for payment of costs granted

Orders

  • issues as to amount recoverable under third quantum award and maximum sum covered by freezing order adjourned for determination after 17 January 2020; unless counter-schedule served by defendant by 17 January 2020, freezing order sum reduced to £2,567,249
  • notice of proceedings to Kazakh Holdings to be served by email