This websites use cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. For more details about cookies and how to manage them, see our cookie policy.

News

Court of Appeal considers the boundaries of Passport Orders

Civil Fraud & Asset Recovery, Judgments

06 August 2021

The power of the Court to grant a passport order under s 37 of the Senior Courts Act 1981 was first recognised by the Court of Appeal in Bayer AG v Winter [1986] 1 W.L.R. 497.  The power to make such an order is an important part of the Court’s procedural armoury, particularly in cases involving civil fraud.

In an important judgment handed down on Friday 30 July 2021 — Lakatamia Shipping Co Ltd v Su [2021] EWCA Civ 1187, the latest of a series of judgments in high profile litigation which has been running for many years — the Court of Appeal (Asplin and Carr LJJ and Sir Nicholas Patten) considered an important “safeguard” to protect the liberty of the respondent to a passport order.  That is, the order must be limited in its duration and should be only so long as is necessary to serve the purpose for which the order was made.  The Court of Appeal observed (at [6] and [42]) that:

“The interference with the liberty of the respondent under a passport order must … be for no longer than is necessary to achieve the purpose for which it was granted. How long that actually is will necessarily depend upon the purpose for which it is granted. … It goes without saying that the longer the order remains in place, the greater will be the onus on the applicant to justify its continuation.”

Courts had previously emphasised the importance of a passport order being very strictly limited in its duration.  The Court of Appeal’s judgment converts those judicial observations into a general principle, albeit a flexible one, and requires passport orders to be closely-monitored in order to ensure that they continue to serve their original purpose in an effective and proportionate manner. 

Thomas Grant QC, Ryan James Turner and Rory Forsyth acted for the appellant, instructed by Ashfords LLP. 

The full judgment is available here.

 

View all news

Recent News

Chambers UK Bar Guide 2022

Maitland Chambers

21 October 2021

We are delighted to have a number of leading recommendations which further cement our position as one of the leading commercial chancery sets at the Bar. 

Read more

Thomas Grant QC and Ed Meuli make Supreme Court...

Maitland Chambers, Responsibility

21 October 2021

Thomas Grant QC and Ed Meuli make Supreme Court appearance to raise money for Classics for All. 

Read more

His Honour Nigel Hague QC

Maitland Chambers

15 October 2021

The Members, Clerks and Staff were saddened to hear of the passing of His Honour Nigel Hague QC.

Read more