Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Discovery refused where its purpose is to formulate a claim which does not otherwise exist
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
High Court refuses to grant order for discovery of documentation relating to the plaintiff company's details to the defendants, whose family home has been the subject of an order for possession granted by the High Court on foot of loan facilities advanced to the defendants which went into default, on the grounds that there is no longer any questions in dispute, and the defendants seek such discovery solely for the purpose of delaying already prolonged litigation and in order to create or formulate a claim which does not already exist.
Discovery - documents relating to the plaintiff's purported change in title of company's name, number off present and past directors of company as well as details of assets held by company - prior motion issued by plaintiff to amend title of proceedings - defendants have appealed an order for possession granted in bank's favour in 2010 - plaintiff substituted into proceedings by way of order of Supreme Court - background to proceedings outlined in judgment of Supreme Court - defendants received loan facilities from bank over a number of years with first legal charge over property and a first ranking mortgage over family home as security - subsequent default of repayment - claim that error in law in making up orders for possession where it was alleged that a part of the relevant map of the property 'turning bay' was never intended to be conveyed to bank - bank's interest in loan facilities validly transferred to plaintiff - whether the court can order discovery in relation to the proceedings as sought by defendants - impossible to see that there are any questions in dispute - Supreme Court has determined the matter and decided not to amend title of proceedings where plaintiff had been substituted into the proceedings in the bank's place - discovery sought in order to formulate a claim which does not exist - purpose of application is to further delay prolonged litigation - application refused.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
