Mobile Menu
Offshore Cases

PLV Hotel -v- S Mora et al [2016] SC (Bda) 16 Com

February 2016 Procedure Summary Judgment Application to Reconsider

BERMUDA

SUPREME COURT

RULING ON APPLICATION TO RECONSIDER

This was a Ruling on an Application by the 2nd Defendant to reconsider the Court’s earlier grant of an Application for Summary Judgment to the Plaintiff pursuant to Order 14 of the Rules of the Supreme Court. The Application was not opposed on its merits by the Second Defendant, whose counsel gave no evidence in opposition to the merits of the Application, but rather advanced only the argument (without formal application in the proceedings) that Cox Hallett Wilkinson Limited should be restrained from acting for the Plaintiff because of conflicting interests with third parties that counsel for the Second Defendant did not represent. Kawaley CJ found that the Application was not properly before the Court. Further, in addition to the relevant complaint appearing to lack substance, the Second Defendant did not have standing to invoke third parties’ confidentiality rights. He suggested that the lack of coherent basis for opposition to the prior application on its merits was due to the fact that its sole purpose was to clothe the Joint Provisional Liquidators of the Plaintiff with the authority to exercise rights held by the Defendants with a view to recovering assets belonging to the Plaintiff.

Pursuant to the Application to reconsider in the present proceedings, counsel for the 2nd Defendant invited the Court to reconsider its decision due to the requirements in the application under Order 14 Rule 1 regarding the filing of a Statement of Claim. It was submitted in response by the Plaintiff that no prejudice flowed from a purely technical irregularity, and that under Order 2 Rule 1 of the Rules, non-compliance with the Rules does not nullify any steps in a civil action.

 

To continue reading full articles in PDF format:
PLV Hotel -v- S Mora et al [2016] SC (Bda) 16 Com

 

Accolades
_

"Few firms can come close to Conyers on one critical metric, and this is the breadth of the client base."
- IFLR1000

EDITOR & HEAD OF LITIGATION BERMUDA

Christian R. Luthi
Tel: +1 441 298 7814
Email: christian.luthi@conyersdill.com


Head of Litigation British virgin islands

Mark J. Forte
Tel: +1 284 852 1113
Email: mark.forte@conyersdill.com


Head of Litigation Cayman Islands

Paul Smith
Tel: +1 345 814 7777
Email: paul.smith@conyersdill.com


HEAD OF THE ASIA DISPUTES & RESTRUCTURING GROUP

Nigel K. Meeson, QC
Tel: +852 2842 9553
Email: nigel.meeson@conyersdill.com

Offshore Cases

PLV Hotel -v- S Mora et al [2016] SC (Bda) 16 Com

13 February 2016

BERMUDA

SUPREME COURT

RULING ON APPLICATION TO RECONSIDER

This was a Ruling on an Application by the 2nd Defendant to reconsider the Court’s earlier grant of an Application for Summary Judgment to the Plaintiff pursuant to Order 14 of the Rules of the Supreme Court. The Application was not opposed on its merits by the Second Defendant, whose counsel gave no evidence in opposition to the merits of the Application, but rather advanced only the argument (without formal application in the proceedings) that Cox Hallett Wilkinson Limited should be restrained from acting for the Plaintiff because of conflicting interests with third parties that counsel for the Second Defendant did not represent. Kawaley CJ found that the Application was not properly before the Court. Further, in addition to the relevant complaint appearing to lack substance, the Second Defendant did not have standing to invoke third parties’ confidentiality rights. He suggested that the lack of coherent basis for opposition to the prior application on its merits was due to the fact that its sole purpose was to clothe the Joint Provisional Liquidators of the Plaintiff with the authority to exercise rights held by the Defendants with a view to recovering assets belonging to the Plaintiff.

Pursuant to the Application to reconsider in the present proceedings, counsel for the 2nd Defendant invited the Court to reconsider its decision due to the requirements in the application under Order 14 Rule 1 regarding the filing of a Statement of Claim. It was submitted in response by the Plaintiff that no prejudice flowed from a purely technical irregularity, and that under Order 2 Rule 1 of the Rules, non-compliance with the Rules does not nullify any steps in a civil action.

 

To continue reading full articles in PDF format:
PLV Hotel -v- S Mora et al [2016] SC (Bda) 16 Com

 

 

EDITOR & HEAD OF LITIGATION BERMUDA

Christian R. Luthi
Tel.: +1 441 298 7814
Email.: christian.luthi@conyersdill.com


Head of Litigation British virgin islands

Mark J. Forte
Tel.: +1 284 852 1113
Email.: mark.forte@conyersdill.com


Head of Litigation Cayman Islands

Paul Smith
Tel.: +1 345 814 7777
Email.: paul.smith@conyersdill.com


HEAD OF THE ASIA DISPUTES & RESTRUCTURING GROUP

Nigel K. Meeson, Q.C.
Tel.: +852 2842 9553
Email.: nigel.meeson@conyersdill.com