Caselaw Digest
Caselaw Digest

Geoffrey Galley v Royal Forex Ltd

[2023] EWHC 3245 (Comm)
A company got a big court judgment against it. They waited too long to ask the court to cancel it, and didn't have a good reason for the delay. The court also decided the company was properly served with the legal papers, even if there were some minor mistakes in how it was done, so the original judgment stands.

Key Facts

  • Default judgment dated 10 August 2022 for £363,120 against Royal Forex Ltd.
  • Application to set aside default judgment and subsequent damages order.
  • Claimant, Geoffrey Galley, appeared in person; Defendant represented by counsel.
  • Dispute over service of the claim form and particulars of claim outside the jurisdiction (Cyprus).
  • Defendant argued invalid service and some other good reason to set aside the judgment.
  • Defendant disputed the court's jurisdiction and claimed concurrent proceedings in Cyprus.
  • Significant delay by the Defendant in applying to set aside the judgment (June 2023, over 8 months after default judgment).

Legal Principles

Setting aside default judgments under CPR 13.3(1)

CPR 13.3(1)

Promptness of application to set aside judgment

CPR 13.3(2)

Three-stage test for relief from sanctions (Denton)

Denton v TH White [2014] EWCA Civ 906

Mandatory setting aside of judgment under CPR 13.2 if wrongly entered

CPR 13.2(a)

Service out of the jurisdiction under CPR 6.40

CPR 6.40

Hague Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents

Hague Service Convention 1965

Rectification of errors of procedure under CPR 3.10

CPR 3.10

Outcomes

Application under CPR 13.3 dismissed.

Defendant's delay in applying to set aside the judgment was not prompt; the failure to file an acknowledgment of service was a serious breach with no satisfactory explanation; the overall circumstances favoured dismissing the application due to the significant delay and the need for efficient litigation.

Application under CPR 13.2 dismissed.

Defendant was properly served with the claim; the alleged procedural defects (lack of translation, response pack, etc.) did not render the default judgment irregular; the court exercised its power under CPR 3.10 to deem service effective despite the procedural errors.

Similar Cases

Caselaw Digest Caselaw Digest

UK Case Law Digest provides comprehensive summaries of the latest judgments from the United Kingdom's courts. Our mission is to make case law more accessible and understandable for legal professionals and the public.

Stay Updated

Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest case law updates and legal insights.

© 2025 UK Case Law Digest. All rights reserved.

Information provided without warranty. Not intended as legal advice.