23 Feb 2009
WILLEM ROBERT MARSMAN, UTA BLEIDISTEL AND THK TRUSTEES LIMITED V ROLAND JOHANNES NIJKRAKE CA CA267/2008
- Citation
- openlaw-927c06e5_30d1_4c10_af40_e7e98fa64e7b.pdf
- Court
- Court of Appeal
Because conflicting expert evidence on when the claimant became 'fully aware' and on whether payments constituted confirmation could not be resolved on the papers, and because the respondent produced prima facie evidence of an assignment which the trustees failed to rebut, the Court held the respondent had a reasonably arguable case and the caveat must be maintained; accordingly the trustees' appeal to lapse the caveat was dismissed.