Iftikhar’s application of 6 May 2025
Iftikhar’s application of 6 May 2025
However, before I can deal with these matters, I need to deal with Iftikhar’s application dated 6 May 2025 for an order lifting any automatic stay of the 2019 English Partnership Claim that may have been imposed by CPR rule 15.11. That rule provides as follows:
“(1) Where—
(a) at least 6 months have expired since the end of the period for filing a defence specified in rule 15.4;
(b) no defendant has served or filed an admission or filed a defence or counterclaim; and
(c) no party has entered or applied for judgment under Part 12 (default judgment), or Part 24 (summary judgment); and
(d) no defendant has applied to strike out all or part of the claim form was form or particulars of claim,
the claim shall be stayed.
(2) Any party may apply under Part 23 for the stay to be lifted. The application must include an explanation for the delay in proceeding with or responding to the claim.”
This rule will impose a stay only if the English court has jurisdiction over Iftikhar in relation to the 2019 English Partnership Claim, so that he would be obliged to serve a defence, but has not done so, and Vaqar has not applied for judgment in default. Vaqar has in fact now applied for judgment in default, by notice dated 30 December 2024 (though that application was not listed before me). But, if a stay had by that date been imposed by the rule, the making of such an application would not of itself reverse it. An application specifically to lift the stay would be needed.
In the present case, Iftikhar has applied for any stay that may have been imposed to be lifted, in order for him to make his other applications. He has explained in the evidence that he did not know about the purported service upon him and therefore was not aware that he had any obligation to respond. I have not yet reached the point in my judgment where I deal with the question whether the English court does have such jurisdiction over Iftikhar. But logically I should deal with this matter now. In my judgment it is sensible to lift any stay that may have been imposed, in order that the other matters before me can be dealt with.
- Heading
- Introduction
- The five applications
- The evidence
- History of the litigation
- The 2018 Possession Claim: trial and appeals
- The present applications
- The 2019 English Partnership Claim
- Challenging the jurisdiction of the English court
- Procedure
- Iftikhar’s application of 6 May 2025
- Was Iftikhar served with the 2019 English Partnership Claim?
- Should the court set aside the permission to serve out?
- Other arguments for service on Iftikhar
- Declaration
- Forum non conveniens
- Strike-out/reverse summary judgment
- The remaining applications
- Conclusions
![[2025] EWHC 2485 (Ch)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_O3rEzCI.png)