Practice

The Chancery Division allowed the second and third defendants’ application to strike out the claimant’s claim, in the course of a dispute concerning the ownership of a Sikh temple. The court held that, while there was no basis for concluding that, as a matter of principle, a judgment obtained by fraud could only be set aside by a party to that earlier action, none of the evidence adduced by the claimant came close to satisfying the test of reasonable diligence that would allow it to be used in evidence.