Paul acted for the Claimant in a long-running contract dispute between two business partners where the Defendant had refused to pay the final instalment of £75,000 due under a Share Purchase Agreement and also sought to argue that the Claimant had acted fraudulently and should repay the £50,000 already paid, plus a further, unspecified, sum to be determined.
The matter was due for hearing at a three-day multi-track trial, but the Defendant partner had failed to comply with various procedural “unless orders” made by the court intended to ensure that the final hearing went ahead (a previous trial date having been ineffective as the Defendant had submitted multiple “trial bundles” which did not comply with the requirements of CPR 39 (see https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part39#39.5). The Defendant made applications seeking extend time for compliance with the orders and to set aside an order striking out an element of his case.
The applications came to be heard very shortly before the new trial date and, on behalf of the Claimant, it was pointed out that the Defendant had breached various parts of the previous “unless order”, had sought the extension after the breach and had not sought relief from sanction and that consequently his Defence and Counterclaims stood struck out.
The Court agreed with the Claimant, finding that the Defendant’s applications were without merit and should be dismissed and giving judgment for the Claimant that the Defendant should pay the full sum claimed plus interest and costs (estimated to be at least a further £70,000).