Alleged Non-Disclosure - Delays in service
Alleged Non-Disclosure - Delays in service
The timeline of the steps taken by the claimants was clearly and expressly disclosed in the evidence in support of the Extension Applications.
Ashdown 4 set out the chronology of the steps taken by the claimants until that date, specifically setting out the dates on which they had made enquiries of the FPS, commissioned certified translations of the service documents, sent the documents to the FPS, received them back from the FPS and sent corrected documents to the FPS. The time they had taken for each step was thus expressly and clearly drawn to the court’s attention. The evidence in support of the two subsequent Extension Applications referred to Ashdown 4 and updated the Court on steps taken since the previous application.
- Heading
- The Applications
- ( the Set Aside Application )
- The Set Aside Application
- The Parties and the Claims
- The Law
- Applications For Extensions Without Notice
- Limitation
- The Second Defendant’s Submissions
- Full and frank disclosure
- No exceptional circumstances or good reasons
- The Claimant’s Submissions
- Will a limitation defence be prejudiced by the Extensions?
- Reasonable steps to serve within time
- Alleged non-disclosure - Limitation
- Alleged Non-Disclosure - Unpaid Costs
- Alleged Non-Disclosure - Delays in service
- Injustice to the Cs
- Discussion and Conclusions on the Set Aside Application
- CPR rules 7.6(3), 6.16 and 6.15
- Claimants’ Submissions
- Second Defendant’s Submissions
- Conclusions
![BL-2021-000228 - [2025] EWHC 2222 (Ch)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_O3rEzCI.png)