Scriven v Scriven & Ors

Scriven v Scriven & Ors

The application to vacate the trial dates was refused because the defendants' difficulties stemmed from their own failures over many months, the amendments did not justify delay, and the overriding objective required expedition and fairness.

Parties
Claimant: Edward Scriven; Defendant: Lee Scriven; Defendant: 2nd Defendant; Defendant: 3rd Defendant; Defendant: 4th Defendant
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 December 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application to Vacate Trial Dates
Outcome
Application to vacate trial dates refused; permission to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
Adjournment, Case Management, Disclosure, Expert Evidence
Civil Procedure Adjournment Case Management Disclosure Expert Evidence

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

Parties

Edward Scriven

Claimant

Lee Scriven

Defendant

2nd Defendant

Defendant

3rd Defendant

Defendant

4th Defendant

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Application to Vacate Trial Dates

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial dates should be vacated due to late amendments and difficulties in disclosure and expert evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The application to vacate the trial dates was refused because the defendants' difficulties stemmed from their own failures over many months, the amendments did not justify delay, and the overriding objective required expedition and fairness.

Court Disposition

Application to vacate trial dates refused; permission to appeal refused.

Orders

  • Costs to be subject to detailed assessment if not agreed, to be paid by the first, second and third defendants to the claimant.