“(i) The respondent’s defence should not be struck-out on account of his failure to comply with an Order for Discovery and Inspection made against him in favour of the claimant on 17 January 2013.”
You're reading the free summary of Rosbotham v Lee Martin. Create a free account to unlock the full reasoning, the cited authorities and the verbatim judgment — plus structured briefs for 412,000+ UK judgments.
No card required. Free forever.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Falls back to Google for old citations BAILII catalogues separately
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.