Mubarak v Mubarik [2008] JCA 149 (10 September 2008)

Mubarak v Mubarik [2008] JCA 149 (10 September 2008)

The revised timetable did not specify whether documents must be in the hands of the Judicial Greffier or opposing party; delivery to the opposing party sufficed. The documents at issue were not covered by Rule 17, as they related to an application for leave to apply out of time. Leave to apply was granted as documents were delivered within the required timeframe by competent means.

Citation
[2008] JCA 149
Parties
Representor/first Respondent: Aaliya Mubarak; First Respondent/appellant: Iqbal Mubarik; Second Respondent: The Craven Trust Company Limited; Third Respondent: Salem Mubarak and Noor Mubarak; Fourth Respondent: Advocate M. P. Renouf (as guardian ad litem of the minor beneficiaries Osman Mubarak and Hamza Mubarak and representative of the unborn or unascertained beneficiaries)
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
10 September 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Interlocutory Application for Leave to File Respondent's Notice Out of Time
Outcome
Leave to apply granted.
Legal Topics
Timetabling, Service of Documents, Leave to File Out of Time
Civil Procedure Timetabling Service of Documents Leave to File Out of Time

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 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Aaliya Mubarak

Representor/first Respondent

Iqbal Mubarik

First Respondent/appellant

The Craven Trust Company Limited

Second Respondent

Salem Mubarak and Noor Mubarak

Third Respondent

Advocate M. P. Renouf (as guardian ad litem of the minor beneficiaries Osman Mubarak and Hamza Mubarak and representative of the unborn or unascertained beneficiaries)

Fourth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Interlocutory Application for Leave to File Respondent's Notice Out of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave should be granted to file Respondent's Notice out of time
  2. 2 Whether service was properly effected under Court of Appeal (Civil) (Jersey) Rules 1964

Ratio Decidendi

The revised timetable did not specify whether documents must be in the hands of the Judicial Greffier or opposing party; delivery to the opposing party sufficed. The documents at issue were not covered by Rule 17, as they related to an application for leave to apply out of time. Leave to apply was granted as documents were delivered within the required timeframe by competent means.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply granted.

Orders

  • First Respondent's contentions to be delivered to Appellant's Advocate and Judicial Greffier by 3pm on 15 September 2008.
  • Appellant's response to be delivered to First Respondent's Advocate and Judicial Greffier by 3pm on 19 September 2008.