Perry v Abraham [2002] JRC 79 (14 April 2002)

Perry v Abraham [2002] JRC 79 (14 April 2002)

The adjournment was granted because new and significant factual and legal issues were raised in the amended answer and counterclaim, which the Plaintiff had not had a fair opportunity to address, and proceeding to trial would be unjust under these circumstances.

Citation
[2002] JRC 79
Parties
Plaintiff: Plaintiff; Defendant: Defendant
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
14 April 2002
Procedural Posture
Civil / Pre Trial Adjournment Application
Outcome
adjournment granted
Legal Topics
Joint Venture, Share Transfer, Adjournment, Pleadings Amendment
Contract Law Company Law Joint Venture Share Transfer Adjournment Pleadings Amendment

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Plaintiff

Plaintiff

Defendant

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Pre Trial Adjournment Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an adjournment should be granted due to late introduction of new factual and legal issues in amended pleadings
  2. 2 Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to 50% of the shares in Lyonnesse Limited or cash compensation
  3. 3 Whether the planning status of land (HO3B) under Portuguese law affects the contractual rights

Ratio Decidendi

The adjournment was granted because new and significant factual and legal issues were raised in the amended answer and counterclaim, which the Plaintiff had not had a fair opportunity to address, and proceeding to trial would be unjust under these circumstances.

Court Disposition

adjournment granted

Orders

  • Trial adjourned; new trial dates fixed for 20th, 21st, and 22nd May, 2002 with liberty to apply.