- Relief from sanctions granted where administrative delays rendered the deadline unrealistic (Melars Group Ltd v East-West Logistics LLP)
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Case details
Restructuring & Insolvency analysis: The appellant company was granted relief from sanctions following the failure to pay the sum of £30,000 into the Court Funds Office (CFO) within 14 days of a consent order. The parties had agreed that unless the relevant sum was paid to the court on account of the respondent’s security for costs of appeal, then the appeal would be dismissed without further order and the appellant would be liable for the respondent’s costs of the appeal. Applying the test summarised in Denton v TH White, the breach was serious and significant but there was a good reason for non-compliance, namely the 14-day deadline was unreasonably short in circumstances where resourcing issues at the CFO resulted in the delayed provision of the relevant Bankers Automated Clearing System (BACS) payment details. The overall circumstances of the case justified granting relief from sanctions to enable the appeal to continue notwithstanding the delay of almost two weeks in paying £30,000 into the court on account of the respondent’s security for costs. The agreed timetable in the consent order was never a realistic one. Written by Darragh Connell, an insolvency and commercial barrister at Forum Chambers.
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