FARRER & CO LLP v JULIE MARIE MEYER

FARRER & CO LLP v JULIE MARIE MEYER

The default judgment was regular as service was valid under section 1140 of the Companies Act 2006; there was no unfairness or procedural irregularity. The defendant's application to set aside the judgment was delayed and lacked merit. Relief from sanctions or extension of time for compliance with the disclosure order was refused as there was no adequate justification for non-compliance. The defendant was found in contempt for continued non-compliance and sentenced to six months' imprisonment, suspended on terms of compliance.

Parties
Claimant: Farrer & Co LLP; Defendant: Julie Marie Meyer
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 January 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil (debt Recovery) / Post Judgment Applications: Set Aside Default Judgment, Relief From Sanctions, Contempt Proceedings
Outcome
Defendant's applications dismissed; defendant found in contempt and sentenced to six months' imprisonment, suspended on terms.
Legal Topics
Default Judgment, Service of Process, Solicitors' Fees, Relief From Sanctions, Contempt of Court
Civil Procedure Contract Law Legal Profession Default Judgment Service of Process Solicitors' Fees Relief From Sanctions Contempt of Court

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

Parties

Farrer & Co LLP

Claimant

Julie Marie Meyer

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (debt Recovery) / Post Judgment Applications: Set Aside Default Judgment, Relief From Sanctions, Contempt Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether default judgment should be set aside for irregularity or in the court's discretion
  2. 2 Whether the defendant should be granted relief from sanctions or extension of time for compliance with disclosure order
  3. 3 Whether the defendant should be sanctioned for contempt for non-compliance with disclosure order

Ratio Decidendi

The default judgment was regular as service was valid under section 1140 of the Companies Act 2006; there was no unfairness or procedural irregularity. The defendant's application to set aside the judgment was delayed and lacked merit. Relief from sanctions or extension of time for compliance with the disclosure order was refused as there was no adequate justification for non-compliance. The defendant was found in contempt for continued non-compliance and sentenced to six months' imprisonment, suspended on terms of compliance.

Court Disposition

Defendant's applications dismissed; defendant found in contempt and sentenced to six months' imprisonment, suspended on terms.

Orders

  • Application to set aside default judgment dismissed
  • Application for relief from sanctions and extension of time refused