0 Bewertungen0% fanden dieses Dokument nützlich (0 Abstimmungen)
149 Ansichten2 Seiten
The defendant's counsel was present at the trial, but the defendant himself was absent. The defendant then applied to set aside the judgment obtained by the plaintiff under O. 35 r. 2(1), which allows judgments obtained in a party's absence to be set aside. However, the court dismissed the application, finding that since the defendant's counsel was present, the defendant was deemed to have appeared at the trial for the purposes of the rule. The court noted the defendant's counsel had acted strangely by informing the court his client discharged him, then seeking to be excused, and questioned his understanding of the consequences. The defendant's only recourse was found to be appeal to the higher court.
The defendant's counsel was present at the trial, but the defendant himself was absent. The defendant then applied to set aside the judgment obtained by the plaintiff under O. 35 r. 2(1), wh…