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 after learning of the orders and had actual knowledge of the proceedings at all material times. His delay of almost six years before applying to set aside the orders was fatal to his application under both CPR r 23.11 and r 39.3(5). Relief from sanctions was also refused applying the Denton principles, as the breaches were serious and significant, and the claimant's explanations were not credible.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 1571
Parties
Claimant: Siamak Feridoni Balengani; Defendant: Mostafa Sharifpoor
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 June 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil / Application to Set Aside Judgment and Orders After Default, With Cross Application for Adjournment and Payment Into Court
Outcome
Application to set aside orders refused. Defendant's cross-application falls away.
Legal Topics
Setting Aside Judgment, Relief From Sanctions, Non Attendance at Hearings, Service of Documents, Promptness in Applications
Civil Procedure Setting Aside Judgment Relief From Sanctions Non Attendance at Hearings Service of Documents Promptness in Applications

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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Siamak Feridoni Balengani

Claimant

Mostafa Sharifpoor

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Application to Set Aside Judgment and Orders After Default, With Cross Application for Adjournment and Payment Into Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's application to set aside orders made in his absence should be granted under CPR r 23.11 and r 39.3
  2. 2 Whether the claimant acted promptly, had a good reason for non-attendance, and had a reasonable prospect of success
  3. 3 Whether relief from sanctions should be granted under CPR r 3.9 and the Denton principles

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to act promptly after learning of the orders and had actual knowledge of the proceedings at all material times. His delay of almost six years before applying to set aside the orders was fatal to his application under both CPR r 23.11 and r 39.3(5). Relief from sanctions was also refused applying the Denton principles, as the breaches were serious and significant, and the claimant's explanations were not credible.

Court Disposition

Application to set aside orders refused. Defendant's cross-application falls away.

Orders

  • Claimant's application to set aside orders of 7 April 2014 and 30 June 2014 is refused.
  • Defendant's cross-application is dismissed as academic.