![[2025] EWHC 2107 (Comm)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_WAai98v.png){kind=logo}
Entry of Default Judgments
Entry of Default Judgments
On 2nd September 2024, the Claimant entered a default judgment against each of the First and Second Defendants in the sum of US$2,749,621.62 plus £10,000.00 (inclusive of costs), as no acknowledgment of service had been filed and no defence had been served by the First and Second Defendants.
On 13th September 2024, the First and Second Defendants received notice of the default judgments entered against them (Ms Ho’s first witness statement, para. 68).
The First and Second Defendants have applied for an order setting aside the default judgments pursuant to CPR rule 13.2 or, alternatively, CPR rule 13.3.
- Heading
- Introduction
- Discussions leading towards the Facility Agreement
- The terms of the Facility Agreement
- The Claimant’s claim under the guarantees
- Legal proceedings brought by the Claimant
- The First and Second Defendants’ Defences
- Entry of Default Judgments
- The Application to set aside the Default Judgments under CPR rule 13.2
- The First and Second Defendants’ submissions
- The Claimant’s submissions
- Determination of the application under CPR rule 13.2
- Are the First and Second Defendants parties to the Facility Agreement?
- Was notification of the appointment of Law Debenture sufficient?
- Is clause 40.2.2 an unfair term under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 ?
- Enforceability under Consumer Credit legislation
- Conclusion
- The Application to set aside the Default Judgments under CPR rule 13.3
- The First and Second Defendants’ submissions
- The Claimant’s submissions
- Determination of the application under CPR rule 13.3
- Do the First and Second Defendants have a real prospect of defending the claim?
- Was the application made promptly?
- The exercise of discretion under CPR rule 13.3
- The Claimant’s application for a conditional order
- Conclusions