Administration of justice - Delay - Judgments and orders

Grahame Henry Bond v (1) Dunster Properties Ltd (2) Dunster Holdings Ltd (3) Grahame Miles James Bond: CA (Civ Div) (Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury, Lady Justice Arden, Lord Justice Longmore): 21 April 2011

The appellant (S) appealed against a decision that he had signed or agreed to be bound by an agreement relating to the development of a property.

The third respondent (J) was S’s son and a property developer. He had found the property which he considered a good development opportunity.

S wished to invest jointly with J as he had funds to invest.

The dispute between the parties related to the terms on which the development was to be carried out and in particular whether S had signed a project partnership agreement.

The judge held that S had signed a copy of the agreement; alternatively, that he had agreed to participate with J in the acquisition and refurbishment of the property on the terms of the agreement.

S contended that the judge’s findings of fact were against the weight of the evidence as a result of the fact that he did not give judgment until 22 months after the conclusion of the hearing.

The respondents argued that the judge’s ability to find the facts was unimpaired by the period of delay.

Held: In all the circumstances, the judge had been entitled to reach the conclusion that he did.

There was no basis for setting aside his finding that S had signed the agreement or agreed to be bound by it.

There was a considerable amount of evidence to support the judge’s inference that that route for developing the property rather than any other route was agreed.

That conclusion did not depend in any important sense on the judge’s assessment of the witnesses and was not affected by the delay of 22 months between the date when the hearing was concluded and the date of judgment.

The delay in delivering judgment did not render the judge’s conclusions on the issues under appeal unsafe so as to make it just to order a retrial (see paragraphs 84-89, 103-105 of judgment).

Appeal dismissed.

Richard Ascroft (instructed by Thrings) for the appellant; Michelle Stevens-Hoare (instructed by the in-house solicitor) for the respondents.