MacKinnon v Regent Trust Company Limited [2005] JCA 056 (25 April 2005)

MacKinnon v Regent Trust Company Limited [2005] JCA 056 (25 April 2005)

The application for adjournment is refused because the parties had ample notice and opportunity to prepare, and the adjournment previously granted was solely to facilitate a possible agreement, which has not materialized. The interests of justice require the proceedings to continue without further delay.

Citation
[2005] JCA 056
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Andrew Kinross MacKinnon; First Defendant/respondent: The Regent Trust Company Limited; Second Defendant: Kenneth James MacKinnon; Third Defendant: Elizabeth Victoria MacKinnon (née Sharman); Fourth Defendant: Sebastian James MacKinnon; Fifth Defendant: Benjamin Thomas Skok MacKinnon; Sixth Defendant: Thomasin Anne Skok MacKinnon; Seventh Defendant: Sophie Linda Skok MacKinnon; Eighth Defendant: Alistair Kinross MacKinnon; Ninth Defendant: Ian James MacKinnon
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
25 April 2005
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Application for Adjournment of Appeal
Outcome
Application for adjournment refused
Legal Topics
Adjournment, Striking Out Pleadings, Family Trust Dispute
Civil Procedure Adjournment Striking Out Pleadings Family Trust Dispute

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Andrew Kinross MacKinnon

Plaintiff/appellant

The Regent Trust Company Limited

First Defendant/respondent

Kenneth James MacKinnon

Second Defendant

Elizabeth Victoria MacKinnon (née Sharman)

Third Defendant

Sebastian James MacKinnon

Fourth Defendant

Benjamin Thomas Skok MacKinnon

Fifth Defendant

Thomasin Anne Skok MacKinnon

Sixth Defendant

Sophie Linda Skok MacKinnon

Seventh Defendant

Alistair Kinross MacKinnon

Eighth Defendant

Ian James MacKinnon

Ninth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Application for Adjournment of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an adjournment of the appeal should be granted
  2. 2 Whether the proceedings should continue as scheduled despite unresolved agreement

Ratio Decidendi

The application for adjournment is refused because the parties had ample notice and opportunity to prepare, and the adjournment previously granted was solely to facilitate a possible agreement, which has not materialized. The interests of justice require the proceedings to continue without further delay.

Court Disposition

Application for adjournment refused

Orders

  • Appeal to proceed as scheduled in the week beginning 16th May 2005