||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 218 (Mar)
||Jonathan Arkush (instructed by Phillipsohn Crawfords Berwald) for the appellant.
||Edward Cohen (instructed by Salans Hertzfeld & Heilbronn) for the respondents.
||14 March 2002
Trust and trustee - Breach of trust - Misappropriation of trust moneys - Claimants obtaining judgment against appellant for breaches of trust - Appellant bringing counterclaim against claimants - Claimants applying for appellant's counterclaim to be struck out or stayed - Master staying counterclaim - Appellant appealing master's order - Claimants cross-appealing - Whether appeal should be allowed - Whether cross-appeal should be allowed.
In the instant case, a decision on case management grounds whether to strike out the counterclaim or stay it until the whole of the judgment debt had been paid required a consideration not only of the appellant's conduct in the litigation but also of the cogency of the claims made in the counterclaim, and the benefit there would be for the appellant if it were tried out. Taking that approach, it was clear that the appellant's conduct of the litigation justified at least a stay until he had paid to the claimants the assessed costs awarded against him.
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary