Apostolides v Orams & Ors

Apostolides v Orams & Ors

There is no fundamental principle of public policy in the United Kingdom that would be manifestly infringed by recognition and enforcement of the Cypriot judgments. The public policy exception under Article 34(1) of Regulation 44/2001 does not apply. There is no appearance of bias in the ECJ proceedings. No further reference to the ECJ is necessary. The appeal is allowed and the orders for registration and enforcement of the Cypriot judgments are reinstated.

Parties
Appellant: Meletios Apostolides; Respondent: David Charles Orams; Respondent: Linda Elizabeth Orams; Intervener: British Residents’ Society
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 January 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Appeal Before Court of Appeal (civil Division) From High Court Order, Following ECJ Preliminary Ruling
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments, Public Policy Exception, Jurisdiction Over Immovable Property, Apparent Bias, Customary International Law
Private International Law European Union Law Civil Procedure Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Public Policy Exception Jurisdiction Over Immovable Property Apparent Bias Customary International Law

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

Parties

Meletios Apostolides

Appellant

David Charles Orams

Respondent

Linda Elizabeth Orams

Respondent

British Residents’ Society

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Appeal Before Court of Appeal (civil Division) From High Court Order, Following ECJ Preliminary Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether recognition and enforcement of Cypriot judgments concerning land in northern Cyprus should be refused on public policy grounds under Article 34(1) of Regulation 44/2001
  2. 2 Whether the ECJ ruling was affected by apparent bias of its President
  3. 3 Whether a further reference to the ECJ was required on public policy or bias grounds

Ratio Decidendi

There is no fundamental principle of public policy in the United Kingdom that would be manifestly infringed by recognition and enforcement of the Cypriot judgments. The public policy exception under Article 34(1) of Regulation 44/2001 does not apply. There is no appearance of bias in the ECJ proceedings. No further reference to the ECJ is necessary. The appeal is allowed and the orders for registration and enforcement of the Cypriot judgments are reinstated.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Orders of Master Eyre registering and declaring enforceable the Cypriot judgments are reinstated.
  • No further reference to the ECJ is required.