Setting aside judgment due to absence at trial (Blake and Ors v Stewart and Ors)

Table of contents

• Practical implications
• Facts
• What did the court decide?
• Delay in making the application and CPR 39.3
• Application of CPR 39.3 where the party has not been served
• Could the Nottingham congregation bring fresh proceedings on the basis that the third defendant was never properly served?
• Is service of the claim form a pre-condition to becoming a party?
• Court details

Article summary

Dispute Resolution analysis: Judge Purle QC has dismissed a defendant’s application for an order declaring that he was not bound by an earlier judgment. In doing so he held that service of the claim form on a new party is not a precondition to them becoming a party to the proceedings and clarified the scope of the court’s powers in dealing with an application to set aside judgment on the basis that the party did not attend trial. The case is also of interest to practitioners advising parties or their associates who decide not to take an active role in the litigation.