Key Legal Issues and Analysis

The two significant applications in this case by the claimant were the set-aside application and the stay-lifting application. The set-aside application was an attempt at reopening previous court orders on such varied grounds as alleged errors of fact and law and the abuse of the defendant by misusing CPR provisions. Master Clark strongly resisted this application, however, because the orders of the court were final, unless exceptional circumstances, such as a manifest mistake, existed. The ruling further cements that the high hurdle to disturb a prior order of the court emphasizes the finality in litigation.

The application to lift the stay was equally important because it applied the Denton test, which assesses whether a procedural default can be excused and a stay lifted. It is an application of this test in a very careful balancing of the parties' interests with the more general considerations of justice and the management of cases, in that the claimant's failure to meet the stringent requirements under CPR 15.11 for lifting the stay demonstrated the keenness of the court on procedural discipline.

Conclusion

This High Court judgment in Michael Wilson & Partners, Limited v. Michael John Short further illustrates the degree of strictness of the procedural hurdles that should be surmounted by litigants in commercial litigation. In dismissing the applications of the claimant, the court has restated the principles of finality and procedural compliance and made crystal-clear that rules governing litigation must be scrupulously followed if there is to be fair and efficient justice.