- Court of Appeal on recognition of foreign judgments obtained by fraud (Gelley v Shepherd)
- The relevant test—'obtained by fraud' not 'tainted by fraud'
- Policy considerations
- Why was the foreign order recognised in the present case?
DR analysis: the Court of Appeal has considered the distinction between foreign judgments ‘obtained by fraud’ as opposed to those ‘tainted by fraud’ when it comes to their recognition within this jurisdiction. A foreign judgment ‘obtained by fraud’ requires the fraud to have been operative in the obtaining of the judgment, ie without such fraud having been practised, the judgment would not have been obtained. While the phrase ‘tainted by fraud’ can be a useful shorthand label, the correct test is a narrower and more precise question than simply to ask whether in general terms the judgment was ‘tainted by fraud’.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial