Whether a non-party can set aside a judgment on the ground of fraud

One of the issues in this case was whether only a party to the original proceedings is entitled to set aside a judgment in those proceedings because it was fraudulently obtained. The judge held that there is no such general principle, and that a non-party can apply to have the judgment set aside: "It might well be that where a judgment is sought to be impeached it would be a rare case where a non-party can say to the court that because a judgment in a case to which he was not a party was obtained by fraud it should be set aside; it might be said that the non-party had no personal (as opposed to a more general public- spirited or general) interest in that happening. However, it seems to me that the present case is different. If [the non-party] is right …. then he… [has] been cheated out of [his] beneficial ownership of the Property because of a fraud, and the courts ought not to allow a judgment obtained by fraud to stand; it would deprive them of their rights". There was no need for the non-party to demonstrate that the original proceedings were part of a conspiracy to damage his interests. The non-party would have to show, though, that (inter alia) the evidence supporting the assertion of fraud could not, with reasonable diligence, have been obtained at the trial.