Thevarajah v Riordan & Ors [2013] EWHC 3179 (Ch) (10 October 2013)

Thevarajah v Riordan & Ors [2013] EWHC 3179 (Ch) (10 October 2013)

Defendants have now complied with the unless order, albeit belatedly, and interests of justice require relief from sanction to be granted. The procedural burdens, reliance on solicitors, and Claimant's own failures in disclosure are relevant. Refusal of relief would be disproportionate and unjust.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2013] EWHC 3179 (Ch)
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
Chancery Division Commercial/property Dispute / Application for Relief From Sanction Following Debarring Order
Outcome
Relief from sanction granted; Defendants' Defence and Counterclaim reinstated.
Legal Topics
Relief From Sanctions, Disclosure Obligations, Freezing Injunctions, Unless Orders, Abuse of Process, Asset Disclosure, Compliance With Court Orders
Civil Procedure Property Law Contract Law Relief From Sanctions Disclosure Obligations Freezing Injunctions Unless Orders Abuse of Process +2 more

Source-derived case record

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 14 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

Chancery Division Commercial/property Dispute / Application for Relief From Sanction Following Debarring Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Defendants should be granted relief from sanction under CPR 3.9 after being debarred for non-compliance with disclosure unless order
  2. 2 Whether Defendants' application constitutes an abuse of process
  3. 3 Whether Defendants have now complied with the disclosure obligations

Ratio Decidendi

Defendants have now complied with the unless order, albeit belatedly, and interests of justice require relief from sanction to be granted. The procedural burdens, reliance on solicitors, and Claimant's own failures in disclosure are relevant. Refusal of relief would be disproportionate and unjust.

Court Disposition

Relief from sanction granted; Defendants' Defence and Counterclaim reinstated.

Orders

  • Defendants permitted to defend the claim; Defence and Counterclaim restored.
  • Claimant required to give disclosure of documents in compliance with CPR 31.