Thevarajah v Riordan & Ors

Thevarajah v Riordan & Ors

The Defendants have now complied with the unless order for disclosure, constituting a material change in circumstances. Relief from sanction under CPR 3.9 is appropriate given the wide-ranging disclosure obligations, absence of wilful non-compliance, reliance on solicitor's advice, and the interests of justice. The application is not an abuse of process; a second application for relief is permissible. The freezing injunction should be varied to allow reasonable expenditure on legal representation and potentially reduce the value of assets subject to the injunction.

Parties
Claimant: Thavatheva Thevarajah; Defendant: John Riordan; Defendant: Eugene Burke; Defendant: Prestige Property Developer UK Limited; Defendant: Barrington Burke
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 October 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application for Relief From Sanction and Variation of Freezing Order
Outcome
Application for relief from sanction granted; variation of freezing order allowed.
Legal Topics
Relief From Sanction, Freezing Injunctions, Disclosure Obligations, Abuse of Process, CPR 3.9, CPR 3.1(7)
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Relief From Sanction Freezing Injunctions Disclosure Obligations Abuse of Process CPR 3.9 CPR 3.1(7)

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 6 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thavatheva Thevarajah

Claimant

John Riordan

Defendant

Eugene Burke

Defendant

Prestige Property Developer UK Limited

Defendant

Barrington Burke

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Application for Relief From Sanction and Variation of Freezing Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Defendants should be granted relief from sanction under CPR 3.9 for failure to comply with disclosure obligations
  2. 2 Whether the application constitutes an abuse of process as a second bite at the cherry
  3. 3 Whether the freezing injunction should be varied

Ratio Decidendi

The Defendants have now complied with the unless order for disclosure, constituting a material change in circumstances. Relief from sanction under CPR 3.9 is appropriate given the wide-ranging disclosure obligations, absence of wilful non-compliance, reliance on solicitor's advice, and the interests of justice. The application is not an abuse of process; a second application for relief is permissible. The freezing injunction should be varied to allow reasonable expenditure on legal representation and potentially reduce the value of assets subject to the injunction.

Court Disposition

Application for relief from sanction granted; variation of freezing order allowed.

Orders

  • Defendants granted relief from sanction under CPR 3.9.
  • Defence and Counterclaim to be restored.