Cavadore Ltd & Anor v Jawa & Anor

Cavadore Ltd & Anor v Jawa & Anor

The attempts at service by the claimants did not comply with Saudi Arabian law or the court's order, and there was no good reason to retrospectively validate service under CPR 6.15(2) or CPR 6.27. Therefore, the default judgments must be set aside and the proceedings are at an end due to expiry of the claim form.

Parties
Claimant: Cavadore Limited; Claimant: Magenta Black Trading Limited; Defendant: Mohammed Jawa; Defendant: Modern Food Company Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 December 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil (commercial/contract/intellectual Property) / Application to Set Aside Default Judgment and Cross Application for Retrospective Validation of Service
Outcome
Default judgments set aside; proceedings at an end due to expiry of claim form.
Legal Topics
Service Out of Jurisdiction, Default Judgment, Franchise Agreements, Trademark Infringement, Jurisdiction Clauses, Retrospective Validation of Service, Stay of Proceedings
Civil Procedure Contract Law Intellectual Property Law Private International Law Service Out of Jurisdiction Default Judgment Franchise Agreements Trademark Infringement +3 more

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 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cavadore Limited

Claimant

Magenta Black Trading Limited

Claimant

Mohammed Jawa

Defendant

Modern Food Company Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (commercial/contract/intellectual Property) / Application to Set Aside Default Judgment and Cross Application for Retrospective Validation of Service

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether service of claim form and particulars of claim on the defendants was valid under Saudi Arabian law and CPR
  2. 2 Whether the court should retrospectively validate service under CPR 6.15(2) and CPR 6.27
  3. 3 Whether default judgments should be set aside for non-service

Ratio Decidendi

The attempts at service by the claimants did not comply with Saudi Arabian law or the court's order, and there was no good reason to retrospectively validate service under CPR 6.15(2) or CPR 6.27. Therefore, the default judgments must be set aside and the proceedings are at an end due to expiry of the claim form.

Court Disposition

Default judgments set aside; proceedings at an end due to expiry of claim form.

Orders

  • Default judgments of 10 October 2018 set aside.
  • No retrospective validation of service under CPR 6.15(2) or CPR 6.27.