||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 84 (Oct)
||Nicholas Taggart (instructed by Overbury Steward Eaton & Woolsey, Norwich) for the claimant.
||Piers Harrison (instructed by Punch Robson, Middlesborough) for the defendant.
||7 October 2002
Action - Dismissal - Abuse of process - Possession of premises - Default judgment against defendant - Action subsequently settled by Tomlin order - Claimant obtaining writ of possession for breach of settlement - Defendant's application to set aside default judgment dismissed - Whether application to set aside writ of possession amounting to abuse of process.
On the evidence, the defendant had an arguable case that a breach of the terms of a Tomlin order resulted in an enforcement of the terms of the agreement and not the revival of the original action. However, that was an argument that had been open to the defendant at an earlier hearing, but she had failed to raise the point. There was a public interest in achieving finality in proceedings; to reopen the instant case at such a late stage amounted to an abuse of process.
- 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