Our articles are written by experts in their field and include individual barristers, solicitors, academics, judges, and leading firms in relevant areas of practice. JIBFL offers authoritative insights into global banking and financial law, providing essential updates for legal practitioners and policymakers. Covering key topics like lending, security interests, derivatives, debt capital markets, banking and finance related disputes, crypto, FinTech and financial regulation, JIBFL serves as a trusted resource for navigating complex legal challenges and staying informed in the financial sector. If you would like to contribute, please email Amanda.Cohen2@lexisnexis.com.
Operative and material? Ten years later: setting aside a judgment for fraud
© Copyright LexisNexis 2024. All rights reserved.
In Balber Kaur Takhar v Gracefield Developments,1 Steven Gasztowicz QC, sitting in the High Court as a deputy High Court judge, set aside a judgment issued ten years earlier on the basis it had been procured by fraud. The court considered the correct test to apply when setting aside a judgment for fraud – which ultimately turns on whether the fraud is operative and material.
If you are already a User, sign in
Or you can register free of charge to read a limited amount of subscriber content per month.
Once you have registered, you will receive an email directing you back to read this article in full.
Alternatively you can subscribe here to read unlimited content.
