Lomax & Ors v Greenslade

Lomax & Ors v Greenslade

The appellant failed to satisfy the mandatory criteria under CPR 39.3(5) for setting aside the judgment due to non-attendance, particularly promptness. The trial judge properly considered the financial circumstances of each claimant and exercised his discretion lawfully in dividing the estate. The only modification...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Respondents: Lomax & Ors; Appellant: Nora Isabella Greenslade
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 July 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed save for a modest reduction in the award to respondents due to new evidence on estate value.
Legal Topics
Inheritance (provision for Family and Dependents) Act 1975, Setting Aside Judgment for Non Attendance, Exercise of Judicial Discretion in Family Provision Claims
Succession Law Civil Procedure Inheritance (provision for Family and Dependents) Act 1975 Setting Aside Judgment for Non Attendance Exercise of Judicial Discretion in Family Provision Claims

Source-derived case record

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lomax & Ors

Respondents

Nora Isabella Greenslade

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial should have been adjourned due to the appellant's health
  2. 2 Whether the judge erred in dividing the estate equally among claimants
  3. 3 Whether the value of the estate was correctly calculated

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant failed to satisfy the mandatory criteria under CPR 39.3(5) for setting aside the judgment due to non-attendance, particularly promptness. The trial judge properly considered the financial circumstances of each claimant and exercised his discretion lawfully in dividing the estate. The only modification warranted was a reduction in the estate's value based on new evidence, which modestly reduced the award to each respondent.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed save for a modest reduction in the award to respondents due to new evidence on estate value.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed except for a reduction in the award to each respondent reflecting the revised estate value of £636,000.
  • The appellant retains the sum of £69,000; the residue is to be divided equally among the three claimants.