Kersten & Ors v Purvis

Kersten & Ors v Purvis

The Claim Form was validly served as the Defendant's nomination letters were not received by the Claimants, so CPR 6.7 was not triggered. Default judgment was irregularly obtained by request in a mixed claim without abandoning other remedies, requiring it to be set aside as of right. Even if service was not valid, the Defendant's evasive conduct justified validation under CPR 6.15(2). The Defendant has a real prospect of defending the claim, and the application to set aside was made promptly enough to warrant relief from sanction.

Parties
Claimant: Peter Kersten; Claimant: Seyed Ali Fazeli; Claimant: Malcom Vaughan; Claimant: Kevin Washbourne; Claimant: Kourosh Manoucheri; Defendant: Stephen Graham Purvis
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 August 2018
Procedural Posture
Commercial Claim / Ruling on Applications to Set Aside Default Judgment and Validate Service
Outcome
Default judgment set aside; claim to proceed.
Legal Topics
Service of Process, Default Judgment, Contractual Limitation, Validation of Service, Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Breach of Warranty
Civil Procedure Contract Law Service of Process Default Judgment Contractual Limitation Validation of Service Fraudulent Misrepresentation Breach of Warranty

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

Parties

Peter Kersten

Claimant

Seyed Ali Fazeli

Claimant

Malcom Vaughan

Claimant

Kevin Washbourne

Claimant

Kourosh Manoucheri

Claimant

Stephen Graham Purvis

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Claim / Ruling on Applications to Set Aside Default Judgment and Validate Service

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Was the Claim Form validly served under CPR Part 6.7?
  2. 2 Should an order be made validating service under CPR Part 6.15(2)?
  3. 3 Was default judgment irregularly obtained under CPR Part 12.4?

Ratio Decidendi

The Claim Form was validly served as the Defendant's nomination letters were not received by the Claimants, so CPR 6.7 was not triggered. Default judgment was irregularly obtained by request in a mixed claim without abandoning other remedies, requiring it to be set aside as of right. Even if service was not valid, the Defendant's evasive conduct justified validation under CPR 6.15(2). The Defendant has a real prospect of defending the claim, and the application to set aside was made promptly enough to warrant relief from sanction.

Court Disposition

Default judgment set aside; claim to proceed.

Orders

  • Default judgment for £1,258,535.21 set aside as of right under CPR 13.2.
  • Claimants' application for validation of service under CPR 6.15(2) would be granted if required.