or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments
Court of Appeal dismisses appeal against decision granting certain interlocutory injunctions restraining the appellant from interfering with receiver and refusing application arising from alleged irregularities in the receiver’s affidavits, on the grounds that: the complaints about the affidavits were not of substance, and none of the criticisms or complaints pleaded in the appellant’s Notice of Appeal could serve in any way to impugn the validity of the judgment and order of the High Court granting injunctive relief to the respondent in these proceedings.
Receivership – injunctions – receiver appointed over lands - alleged interference by the appellant with the receiver – appeal against decision granting certain interlocutory injunctions – appeal against dismissal of application for trial of a preliminary issue whether affidavit was correct – background facts - complains that the jurat to the respondent’s affidavit does not comply with this rule because although the Commissioner for Oaths records the affidavit as having been sworn before him on “this 19th day of July 2017” he does not specify the time of day on which the affidavit was sworn – complaint not of substance - every affidavit shall state the description and true place of abode of the deponent – previously rejected by the Court - High Court was not faced with any actual conflict of fact on the affidavits - substantive contents of the parties’ respective affidavits - judgment appealed against - notice of appeal - none of the criticisms or complaints pleaded in the appellant’s Notice of Appeal could serve in any way to impugn the validity of the judgment and order of the High Court granting injunctive relief to the respondent in these proceedings – assertions of fraud, perjury, a rush to judgment and so forth - no evidence whatever has been offered to support such assertions - allegation of non-compliance with s. 97 of the Land and Conveyancing Reform Act 2009 (the Act of 2009) was not raised in the Court below - trial judge identified the correct legal principles applicable to the granting of interlocutory injunctions - evidence before him, which was not controverted in any essential detail, clearly justified the granting of injunctive relief on an interlocutory basis – no error of principle – appeal dismissed –
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.