Court of Appeal—varying and revocation of Tomlin orders considered (Watson v Mahmood Sadiq)

Table of contents

• Practical considerations
• Court's jurisdiction to vary or revoke a Tomlin order
• The judge's function at trial when faced with a dispute which 'ought sensibly to be compromised'
• Impact of appellant's own conduct as to whether the court should exercise its discretion to revoke the court order
• Court details
• Facts and judgment

Article summary

The Court of Appeal has refused to vary or set aside a consent order which formed part of a Tomlin Order. In doing so it considered the different approaches to determine whether it has jurisdiction to revoke or amend either (1) the schedule to the Tomlin order or (2) the consent order itself. In doing so, it also considers the subsequent conduct of the party seeking the change. In addition, the judgment highlights the approach judges can take at trial in seeing whether the parties can reach a settlement.