Read the full judgment text of CACV 13/1994 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 3 March 1994 before Penlington, Nazareth and Godfrey, JJ.A..
Civil procedure – adjournment of trial – speedy trial – Mareva injunction – fair trial – balance of prejudice – Court of Appeal – The defendants appealed orders for a speedy trial on 14 March 1994, arguing they could not be ready due to Mareva injunctions preventing fundraising. The judge had allowed sale of property at 85% value but the time was insufficient. The Court of Appeal held that the primary purpose of justice is a fair trial for both parties; the risk of injustice to the defendants if the trial proceeded outweighed the inconvenience to the plaintiffs from an adjournment. Trial dates vacated and refixed for 10 October 1994. The court also set aside parts of the judge's orders that adjourned the defendants' Mareva injunction discharge applications to trial, allowing the defendants to reapply in light of the changed circumstances.
Legal issues: Adjournment of trial due to insufficient preparation time · Discharge of Mareva injunctions after adjournment
Outcome: Appeal allowed in part; trial dates vacated and refixed for 10 October 1994; parts of judge's orders adjourning Mareva injunction discharge applications set aside.