Jean-Paul Blissett v JSN Development Group Ltd

• Jurisdiction: Antigua and Barbuda
• Judge: Michel, M.
• Judgment Date: 25 August 2025
• Judgment citation (vLex): [2025] ECSC J0825-2
• Docket Number: CLAIM NO. ANUHCV2019/0356
• Court: High Court (Antigua)

Between:

Jean-Paul Blissett

Claimant

and

[1] JSN Development Group Limited

[2] Blupearl Limited

Defendants

[2025] ECSC J0825-2

CLAIM NO. ANUHCV2019/0356

THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE

(CIVIL DIVISION)

Appearances:

Mr. Justin L. Simon KC, Counsel for the Claimant

Mr. Andrew O'Kola, Counsel for the Defendants

DECISION

Michel, M.

1 This is the decision of the Court on an application by the Defendants to set aside an order made in their absence on 28 ^th November, 2024. The order sought to be set aside entered judgment for the Claimant on certain terms following an application by the Claimant under rule 26.5 of the Civil Procedure Rules (Revised Edition) 2023 (“ CPR 2023”) for judgment without trial after striking out.

2 It is necessary to set out the background and procedural history of these proceedings in some detail to place the Defendants' application into context.

Background

3 By claim form and statement of claim filed on 28 ^th June, 2019 Melt Design Hub Limited (“ Melt Design”) commenced proceedings against the Defendants for breach of copyright entitlement. Melt Design alleged in the claim that it was the owner of the copyright in all drawings, specifications, images, plans and documents (together “architectural works”) created by Syntax Group Limited, Syntax Design Limited and/or Syntax UK Limited (“ Syntax Group”) for a certain hotel development project in Antigua. Melt Design pleaded that by agreement made on 4 ^th January, 2013 it acquired all the assets including the exclusive copyrights in all materials produced by the Syntax Group and the benefits of all the appointments of the Syntax Group.

4 At paragraph 10 of the statement of claim, Melt Design alleged that Jean-Paul Blissett, a former Director of the Syntax Group, became a shareholder and the Managing Director of Melt Design. Further, that a former director of the Syntax Group with no interest in Melt Design wrongfully purported to release to the 1 ^st Defendant, copyright interest that he claimed he owned in the designs produced by the Syntax Group then assigned to Melt Design.

5 Melt Design further alleged that the 1 ^st Defendant acquired the land and building which constituted the hotel development project in Antigua and the Defendants took steps to complete the construction of and market the hotel development using the architectural works produced by Syntax Group and since owned by Melt Design. Melt Design alleged that the Defendants had, without the approval or license from, or assignment by Melt Design, proceeded to utilize Melt Design's architectural works in completing the hotel development.

6 Melt Design, by its claim, therefore sought injunctions against the Defendants in relation to the architectural works prepared by Melt Design for the construction and marketing promotion of the hotel development. The claim also sought an order for delivery of possession of all copies of the architectural works and damages to be assessed.

7 The Defendants filed a defence to Melt Design's claim and subsequently amended the defence. In their amended defence, the Defendants denied that Melt Design were the owners of the copyright in the architectural works. They denied that the alleged assignment of the architectural works to Melt Design was effective as they alleged that it was not in accordance with section 23 of the Copyright Act, 2003.1 Alternatively, the Defendants put Melt Design to strict proof that Syntax Group originally held the ownership rights of the architectural works and that Melt Design subsequently acquired such ownership right.

8 The Defendants further denied that the agreement between Syntax Group and Melt Design was a valid agreement on the basis that the conditions amounting to a valid agreement had not been met.

9 At paragraph 12 of their amended defence, the Defendants put Melt Design to strict proof, inter alia, that the present Claimant, Jean-Paul Blissett, became a shareholder and managing director of Melt Design. The Defendants further alleged that the former director referred to by Melt Design at paragraph 10 of its

statement of claim executed a binding agreement releasing the 1 ^st Defendant from any claims with respect to any copyright interests in all architectural drawings created by him, his affiliates or companies controlled now or in the past by him or his affiliates, including any claim in respect of interest that the Claimant purports to have assigned to it

10 The Defendants further denied the particulars of breach alleged by Melt Design. They denied that Melt Design had any copyright entitlement and that they breached any such entitlements. The Defendants further averred that they did not use Melt Design's alleged intellectual property. They averred that completely new master plans were developed by another architecture and design firm which were utilized by the Defendants. The Defendants therefore prayed that Melt Design's claim be dismissed.

11 By order dated 2 ^nd March, 2022 made ex parte, Jean-Paul Blissett was substituted as Claimant in the proceedings in place of Melt Design pursuant to rule 19.2(5)(b) of the Civil Procedure Rules 2000 (“ CPR 2000”) on the basis that he had acquired Melt Design's interest in these proceedings.

12 Following multiple adjourned case management conferences, on 9 ^th October, 2023 the Court issued further case management directions to the Parties for trial and directed that the Defendants make standard disclosure on or before 24 ^th October, 2023 and that the Parties file and exchange their witness statements on or before 8 ^th December, 2023. The Defendants failed to comply with these directions.

13 On 18 ^th December, 2023 the Court made an order that unless the Defendants make an application for relief from sanctions and an extension of time to comply with the order dated 9 ^th October, 2023 the Defendants' defence would stand struck out. On 10 ^th April, 2024 the Court made a revised unless order directing that unless the Defendants applied for relief from sanctions and an extension of time to make standard disclosure and file their witness statements as ordered on 9 ^th October 2023 on or before 15 ^th May, 2024 the Defendants' defence would stand struck out. The revised unless order dated 10 ^th April, 2024 was duly served personally on the Chambers of OMO Law, legal practitioners for the Defendants on 16 ^th April, 2024 as evidenced in the affidavit of service of Leoma Prince, Litigation Clerk filed by the Claimant on 25 ^th April, 2024. The revised unless order was not set aside or appealed and the Defendants failed to comply with the order. Accordingly, the Defendants' defence was struck out by virtue of the sanction imposed in the revised unless order.

14 The Claimant subsequently applied for judgment without trial after striking out pursuant to rule 26.5 of CPR 2023 on notice to the Defendants. The application was subsequently amended on 31 ^st October, 2024. The Claimant's application for judgment came on for hearing on 7 ^th November, 2024 and was adjourned to 20 ^th November, 2024 due to short service of the notice of hearing on Counsel for the Defendants. When the application came on for hearing on 20 ^th November, 2024 the hearing was further adjourned to 28 ^th November, 2024 as Counsel for the Defendants was involved in a criminal trial before a judge on the same day.

15 On 27 ^th November, 2024 the day before the adjourned hearing of the Claimant's application for judgment, the Defendants filed an application for relief from sanctions and an extension of time to comply with the order dated 18 ^th December, 2023. This application also sought in the alternative an order that the Claimant's claim be struck out. Neither Counsel for the Defendants nor any representatives of the Defendants attended the hearing of the Claimant's application for judgment on 28 ^th November, 2024. The Court proceeded to hear and determine the Claimant's application in the absence of the Defendants. The application for judgment was granted and judgment was entered for the Claimant on certain terms.

The Set Aside Application

16 By notice of application filed on 13 ^th December, 2024 the Defendants seek to set aside the order made on 28 ^th November, 2024 (“ the set aside application”) and obtain the following relief:-

• 1. The Defendants be granted relief from sanctions and an extension of time for failure to comply with the order dated 18 ^th December, 2023;

• 2. The execution of the order dated 28 ^th November, 2024 be stayed pending the determination of the Applicants' application to set aside the order dated 28 ^th November, 2024;

• 3. Alternatively, for the judgment entered on 28 ^th November, 2024 to be struck out on the basis of alleged fraud and misrepresentation and that the affidavit in support filed on 27 ^th November, 2024 stands as further evidence in support of this relief sought;

• 4. No order as to costs; and

• 5. Such further and other relief as this Honourable Court deems fit.

17 The Defendants' set aside application relies on some 22 grounds; however, these grounds in my view can be summarised as follows:-

• (1) The decision of 28 ^th November, 2024 was made in the absence of the Defendants and there is good reason for the absence of the Defendants and of their Counsel.

• (2) The set aside application is being made at the soonest convenience.

• (3) The failure to comply with the order dated 18 ^th December, 2023 within the specified time was not intentional and there is a reasonable explanation.

• (4) Granting the applications would allow the Court to fairly and justly deal with the case.

• (5) The Defendant has a real prospect of success in defending the claim.

• (6) There is no prejudice to the Claimant if the application is granted.

• (7) There is an allegation that there was an unlawful disposition of assets by Melt Design, the previous Claimant in these proceedings...