Page 108 - 9. 1st half 2018 New 26-05-21 No Table

injunction was discharged by the Court. The
police advised that had the injunction been in
place, the Defendant

14,
13th December 2017
13th December 2017
09th August 2017.
02nd and 3rd January 2018

CLAIM NUMBER: D02EDO73

IN THE EDMONTON COUNTY COURT

BETWEEN:

{CLAIMANT}

THE MAYOR AND BURGESSES OF THE
LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD

-AND-

(DEFENDANT)

MR SIMON CORDELL

DIRECTIONS ORDER

could have well been arrested in light of Mr
Mathiyalagan being able to evidence the incident
by way of the audio recordings.
41. The recent incidents and death threats are
extremely serious and i have concerns that the
Defendant may escalate his actions further. Mr
Mathiyalagan and his family do not feel safe
anymore and on that basis, it would be of great
assistance if the Claim and injunction order be
reinstated as soon as possible.
Declaration from the Court that the injunction
order has been effective throughout the period
of 13th December 2017 to present
42. The interim injunction order was
discharged purely because of a technicality,
however had the Court realised that the Claimant
had filed the questionnaire on time, it would not
have struck out the Claim.
43. The Court should note that the Defendant
started to act anti-socially again, soon after he was
notified by the Court that the interim order has