Midland and Premier Properties Limited & Anor v Rakesh Singh Doal & Ors

Midland and Premier Properties Limited & Anor v Rakesh Singh Doal & Ors

The appellants complied with the unless orders by giving the required instructions and serving the schedule produced by the e-disclosure provider; the orders did not require them to guarantee completeness or accuracy of the schedule. The strike out and debarring of defences was disproportionate as the judge failed to consider less draconian alternatives such as further unless orders, especially given the progress made and the limited scope of obligations. The appeal is allowed, orders set aside, and the matter remitted for re-trial.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Midland Premier Properties Limited; Claimant/respondent: Sanman Property Management Limited; Defendant: Rakesh Singh Doal; Defendant/appellant: 2020 Living Limited; Defendant/appellant: Samuel Ginda; Defendant/appellant: Taylor Grange 2 Limited; Defendant/appellant: TGDM One Limited; Defendant/appellant (in CA 2024): Taylor Grange DM Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 February 2026
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed; orders set aside; matter remitted for re-trial before a different judge.
Legal Topics
Unless Orders, Disclosure, Relief From Sanction, Strike Out, Split Trials, Disclosure Obligations, Sanctions for Non Compliance
Civil Procedure Contract Law Commercial Law Unless Orders Disclosure Relief From Sanction Strike Out Split Trials +2 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 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Midland Premier Properties Limited

Claimant/respondent

Sanman Property Management Limited

Claimant/respondent

Rakesh Singh Doal

Defendant

2020 Living Limited

Defendant/appellant

Samuel Ginda

Defendant/appellant

Taylor Grange 2 Limited

Defendant/appellant

TGDM One Limited

Defendant/appellant

Taylor Grange DM Limited

Defendant/appellant (in CA 2024)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellants failed to comply with unless orders regarding disclosure and schedule production
  2. 2 Whether the strike out and debarring of defences was proportionate and justified
  3. 3 Interpretation of procedural orders and obligations under them

Ratio Decidendi

The appellants complied with the unless orders by giving the required instructions and serving the schedule produced by the e-disclosure provider; the orders did not require them to guarantee completeness or accuracy of the schedule. The strike out and debarring of defences was disproportionate as the judge failed to consider less draconian alternatives such as further unless orders, especially given the progress made and the limited scope of obligations. The appeal is allowed, orders set aside, and the matter remitted for re-trial.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; orders set aside; matter remitted for re-trial before a different judge.

Orders

  • Judge's orders of 13 September 2024, 23 September 2024, 24 December 2024 and 23 January 2025 set aside in so far as they affect the appellants.
  • Matter remitted for re-trial before a different judge.