Geoffrey Galley v Royal Forex Ltd
[2023] EWHC 3245 (Comm)
Michael Wilson & Partners, Ltd v Michael John Short
19 August 2024
[2024] EWHC 2113 (Ch)
High Court
A company sued a man for company debts. The case was delayed due to the claimant's representative's misfortunes and other issues. The court wouldn't let the company restart its initial failed attempt to dismiss part of the case. However, the court allowed the case to proceed as the man hadn't shown any harm from the delay, and there's a chance the claimant could win.
Key Facts
- •Claimant, Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd (a BVI company), seeks to hold Defendant, Michael Short, personally liable for debts of GBM Minerals Engineering Consultants Ltd.
- •Claim form issued May 4, 2021; Defence due June 1/2, 2021.
- •Defendant applied for security for costs; various adjournments and extensions followed.
- •Claim automatically stayed on December 2, 2021, due to non-filing of Defence (CPR 15.11).
- •Claimant's applications: (1) set aside the August 2023 order dismissing its strike-out application; (2) lift the automatic stay.
- •Claimant's delays attributed to claimant's representative's illness, Covid, and involvement in another case.
Legal Principles
Court's jurisdiction to reopen a sealed order under the Barrell jurisdiction.
Re Barrell Enterprises [1973] 1 WLR 19 and Re L-B (Children)(Preliminary Finding: Power to Reverse) [2013] UKSC 8
Court's power to vary or revoke an order under CPR 3.1(7).
CPR 3.1(7), Tibbles v SlG PLC [2012] 1 WLR 2591, Thevarajah v Riordan [2016] 1 WLR 76, Edwards v Golding [2007] EWCA Civ 416
Automatic stay under CPR 15.11 and lifting of stay.
CPR 15.11, Football Association Premier League Ltd v O’Donovan [2017] EWHC 152 (Ch), Bank of America Europe v Citta Metropolitana di Milano [2022] EWHC 1544 (Comm), Denton v TH White Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 906
Outcomes
Set aside application dismissed.
Claimant's reliance on Barrell jurisdiction was unarguable following Wilson v Emmott [2023] EWHC 2415 (KB); Claimant's attempt to rely on CPR 3.1(7) failed due to lack of amendment and insufficient grounds.
Stay lifted.
Balancing factors under Denton test, considering seriousness of breach, reasons for delay, and all circumstances (merits of claim, lack of prejudice to defendant, defendant's inaction).
Similar Cases
Simon Bain Building Services Limited v Jenna Cardone & Anor
[2023] EWHC 2916 (Ch)
Knaresborough Investments Limited v Styles & Wood Group Limited (in liquidation) & Ors
[2024] EWHC 1356 (Comm)
Michael Wilson & Partners Limited v John Forster Emmott & Ors
[2024] EWHC 449 (Comm)
Thiscompany Limited & Ors v David John Welsh & Ors
[2024] EWHC 2159 (Comm)