When a company accused of selling counterfeit goods failed to comply with repeated court orders to produce information, only an optimist could have expected anything other than a rough ride in the Court of Appeal.
The company was accused of selling counterfeit and ‘grey-imported’ Fred Perry sportswear and ignored a number of court orders for a period of nearly a year as the Fred Perry group attempted to obtain damages.
As a result of the non-cooperation, Fred Perry applied for an injunction against the trader and for its defence to be struck out. The day before the application was due to be heard, the defendant produced an affidavit claiming that the reason for its non-compliance was, in effect, that it had financial problems. It claimed it had a good defence.
The case ended up in the Court of Appeal, where Lord Justice Jackson commented, "...non-compliance with the Civil Procedure Rules and orders of the court on the scale that has occurred in this case cannot possibly be tolerated. Any further grant of indulgence to the defendants in this case would be a denial of justice to the claimants and a denial of justice to other litigants whose cases await resolution by the court."
The counterfeiter’s appeal was thrown out in almost all respects.
Failing to comply with orders of the court is a dangerous strategy and creates a risk that the court will simply throw out your case.
Dean Parnell, Sydney Mitchell LLP
If you find yourself enmeshed in a dispute, it is best to take legal advice earlier rather than later.
For further information on this article, contact Dean Parnell on 0121 698 2200, email d.parnell@sydneymitchell.co.uk or fill in our online enquiry form.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
