Jersey Unreported Judgments

Between: The American Endeavour Fund Ltd Plaintiff

And: Arthur I Trueger First Defendant

And: Berkeley International Capital Corporation

(A California Corporation) Second Defendant

And: London Pacific Group Ltd Third Defendant

(formerly known as Govett & Co Ltd)

And: London Pacific International Ltd Fourth Defendant

(formerly known as Berkeley Govett International Ltd)

And: James Hardie Industries Ltd First Third Party

And:Firmandale Investments Ltd Second Third Party

And:Robert A Christensen Third Third Party

And:Alison Mary Holland Fourth Third Party

(by original action)

AND

Between: Berkeley International Capital Corporation

(A California Corporation) First Plaintiff

And:London Pacific Group Ltd

(formerly known as Govett & Co Ltd) Second Plaintiff

And: London Pacific International Ltd

(formerly known as Berkeley Govett International Ltd) Third Plaintiff

And: The American Endeavour Fund Ltd First Defendant

And: James Hardie Industries Ltd Second Defendant

And: James Hardie Finance Ltd Third Defendant

And: Firmandale Investments Ltd Fourth Defendant

And: Michael G Allardice Fifth Defendant

And: Robert A Christensen Sixth Defendant

And: Graeme A Elliott Seventh Defendant

And: Alison Mary Holland Eighth Defendant

And: Volaw Trust & Corporate Services Ltd Ninth Defendant

(by way of counterclaim)

Application by the First, Second, Third, and Fourth Defendants in the Original Action for an Order that:

1unless the Plaintiff to the original action does forthwith, or in any event by or before 5 pm on 13 January 1998, comply with the Orders of the Lieutenant Bailiff dated 25 July and 1 December 1997, by (a) serving a summons to amend the Order of Justice; and (b) complying with all and any directions which might be made by the Court at the determination of this summons, then the date fixed for the hearing of the application to amend the Order of Justice (such date being presently fixed for 24^th February, 1998) be vacated; and

2. in the event of the Plaintiffs complying with the Order sought in paragraph (1) above, the date fixed for filing affidavit evidence in relation to the application to amend the Order of Justice be amended accordingly

Advocate W J Bailhache for the Plaintiff

Advocate J G White for the First, Second, Third, and Fourth Defendants,

in the original action

JUDGMENT

THE LIEUTENANT BAILIFF: The amended Order of Justice has now been prepared and it is accepted that it has been properly served. It has been amended by way of substitution rather than by the more usual method of underlining the new and crossing out the discarded passages. In the circumstances it is a sensible way to proceed.

The Defendants request more time than was provided by the original timetable under the Act of 1 December 1997 to analyse it and to see whether there are grounds to seek to object to the application to amend the Order of Justice or to seek to object to the contents of the Order of Justice in whole or in part. The Plaintiff objects stating that since the claim in negligence has been dropped there are now no grounds for any objections as to the contents. That may well be so but the Defendants are entitled to make their own analysis and in the view of the Court, although there is on the submissions made at present no reason to abandon 24 February as a hearing date, (should any application to object proceed, the timetable imposed on the Defendants for filing any affidavit by the Act of 1 December 1997 is too tight in the circumstances and the timetable for filing affidavits will be revised as follows:

The Defendants will file any affidavit evidence they deem appropriate by close of business on 27 January 1998. Affidavits by the Plaintiff in response are to be filed by close of business on 10 February 1998 and the Defendants shall be at liberty to file any further affidavits in reply by close of business on 17 February 1998. The hearing date of 24 February 1998 is to stand.

No authorities