Balengani v Sharifpoor [2020] EWHC 1571 (QB) (19 June 2020)

Balengani v Sharifpoor [2020] EWHC 1571 (QB) (19 June 2020)

The claimant failed to act promptly in applying to set aside the orders, having actual or constructive knowledge of the proceedings and orders for almost six years; therefore, the mandatory requirements under CPR r 39.3(5) and the Denton principles for relief from sanctions were not satisfied. The applications to set aside the orders from both hearings were refused.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 1571 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Siamak Feridoni Balengani; Defendant: Mostafa Sharifpoor
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 June 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Claim and Counterclaim / Application to Set Aside Judgment and Orders, Post Judgment Enforcement
Outcome
Claimant's applications to set aside orders from both hearings refused; defendant's cross-application falls away.
Legal Topics
Relief From Sanctions, Setting Aside Judgment, Failure to Attend Hearings, CPR R 23.11, CPR R 39.3, CPR R 3.9, Denton Principles
Civil Procedure Contract Law Relief From Sanctions Setting Aside Judgment Failure to Attend Hearings CPR R 23.11 CPR R 39.3 CPR R 3.9 +1 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 3 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Siamak Feridoni Balengani

Claimant

Mostafa Sharifpoor

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Claim and Counterclaim / Application to Set Aside Judgment and Orders, Post Judgment Enforcement

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant acted promptly in applying to set aside orders
  2. 2 Whether the claimant had a good reason for not attending hearings
  3. 3 Whether the claimant has a reasonable prospect of success at trial

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to act promptly in applying to set aside the orders, having actual or constructive knowledge of the proceedings and orders for almost six years; therefore, the mandatory requirements under CPR r 39.3(5) and the Denton principles for relief from sanctions were not satisfied. The applications to set aside the orders from both hearings were refused.

Court Disposition

Claimant's applications to set aside orders from both hearings refused; defendant's cross-application falls away.

Orders

  • Applications to set aside orders of 7 April 2014 and 30 June 2014 refused.
  • Parties invited to agree costs and consequential orders within 14 days; failing agreement, further oral hearing may be listed.