Cecily Crampin and Julia Petrenko (Falcon Chambers) – The Scope of PD 51 Z: Court of Appeal decision in Marshall (acting by Mehmet Arkin as fixed charge receiver) v Marshall & Another

 

Cecily Crampin and Julia Petrenko consider the implications of Marshall (acting by Mehmet Arkin as fixed charge receiver) v Marshall & Another[2020] EWCA Civ 620 in which the Court of Appeal dismissed the challenges made to Practice Direction PD 51Z and confirmed that the stay applies even to directions agreed by the parties, though the parties are at liberty to follow agreed directions during the stay period, and a failure to comply with those agreed directions may be relevant to any further directions when the stay is lifted. Most importantly, there is a theoretical power to lift the stay. However such a power can only be exercised in the most exceptional circumstances.

Click here to read the article.