Representation of Sarre re Clameur de Haro [2000] JRC 61 (07 April 2000)

Representation of Sarre re Clameur de Haro [2000] JRC 61 (07 April 2000)

The Clameur de Haro was wrongfully raised because the Viscount was executing a lawful court order, not committing a wrongful act; therefore, the injunction is discharged and a nominal fine imposed.

Citation
[2000] JRC 61
Parties
Defendant: Mr Flint; Claimant: Viscount's Department
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
07 April 2000
Procedural Posture
Injunction/discharge of Clameur De Haro / Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
injunction discharged; nominal fine imposed; no order as to damages or costs
Legal Topics
Clameur De Haro, Eviction, Wrongful Injunction
Civil Procedure Property Law Clameur De Haro Eviction Wrongful Injunction

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Flint

Defendant

Viscount's Department

Claimant

Procedural Posture

Injunction/discharge of Clameur De Haro / Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Clameur de Haro was lawfully raised against the Viscount's execution of an eviction order
  2. 2 Consequences of wrongfully raising the Clameur de Haro

Ratio Decidendi

The Clameur de Haro was wrongfully raised because the Viscount was executing a lawful court order, not committing a wrongful act; therefore, the injunction is discharged and a nominal fine imposed.

Court Disposition

injunction discharged; nominal fine imposed; no order as to damages or costs

Orders

  • Injunction discharged
  • Fine of £25.00 imposed on Mr Flint, payable within three months