Yellow Van Company Ltd v Driver

Relief from a judgment in default requires a defendant to satisfy the conditions in Civil Procedure Rules 1998, CPR 13.3. The defendant must show a real prospect of successfully defending the claim or another good reason for setting the judgment aside. The court must also consider whether the application was made promptly. A substantial delay materially strengthens the need for a particularly strong merits case or another compelling reason. Evidence which merely repeats, explains or is consistent with the pleaded case does not establish a real prospect of successfully defending the claim.

The claimant brought proceedings alleging passing off, trade mark infringement and copyright infringement concerning its trading names and logos. Judgment in default was entered against the defendant by Arnold J in November 2013, including an injunction. The defendant later applied to set that judgment aside, relying on evidence concerning the parties’ former business relationship, ownership of the business and goodwill, and related correspondence and website material.

The defendant was unrepresented. The central issues were whether he had a real prospect of successfully defending the claim, whether there was another good reason to set aside the judgment, and the significance of his delay in making the application.

1. The application to set aside the judgment in default was dismissed.

2. Under CPR 13.3 of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998, the court may set aside or vary a judgment entered under Part 12 where the defendant has a real prospect of successfully defending the claim, or where there is some other good reason for setting aside or varying the judgment or allowing a defence.

3. CPR 13.3(2) requires the court to have regard to whether the application was made promptly. The defendant waited approximately 102 days, or 14 to 15 weeks, after service of the order. That was not prompt and meant that the court required a particularly strong merits case or another compelling reason before granting relief.

4. The defendant’s evidence did not raise a good defence. The matters relied on, including his alleged partnership with Mr Terry, website screenshots, an employee’s statement, a press release, a driver’s manual and correspondence about mediation, were either unsupported, inconsistent, or did not undermine the pleaded case that the company owned the relevant goodwill and rights.

5. No other compelling reason for setting aside the judgment was established. The order, including the injunction, therefore remained in force.

First-instance decision. No appellate history is stated in the judgment.