23 Apr 2021
The Court refused leave to appeal and refused stays because the plaintiff's grounds were not reasonably arguable, Judge Field's findings that the Disclosure Order had not been complied with were entitled to deference, and the discretionary orders for substituted service/dispensing with personal service were properly exercised and not plainly wrong.
6 Nov 2020
The court held that dispensing with personal service of the order for further and better particulars was justified on the facts (solicitors' receipt, respondent's knowledge and conduct), that the respondent knowingly and non-accidentally failed to comply with the order to produce the original PhD certificate and particulars, and therefore was in contempt of court; sentence was adjourned for hearing.
15 Dec 2006
Dispense with personal service because the defendant's absence was for bereavement not evasion, he was aware of the order and represented, there was no prejudice, the plaintiff was willing to correct the drafting error, and enforceability required permitting committal if breached.