The tenant had a bad record of payment of rent. The local authority sought possession. The district judge suspended the possession warrant. The authority appealed to the county court judge on the basis that the district judge had made his order without seeing the court file which in turn showed the many attempts by the … Continue reading Richardson v Ealing London Borough Council: CA 22 Nov 2005
The appellant sought leave to appeal out of time against an order dismissing his action against the solicitors who had acted for his former spouse in matrimonial proceedings. Held: Leave was refused. A solicitor owes his duty to his own client, not to the opponent. The action and the appeal were totally without merit. The … Continue reading Wilkes v Ballam Delaney Hunt (A Firm): CA 18 Aug 2005
An accountant sought payment of his professional fees. The defendants had sought to re-amend their defence and counterclaim. Appeals had variously been allowed to go ahead or denied after the master had not been able to deal with all of them for lack of time. Held: The several appeals raised common issues. Some were first … Continue reading The Convergence Group Plc and Another v Chantrey Vellacott (a Firm): CA 16 Mar 2005
The court considered an application for leave for a second appeal. Held: Pursuant to the Practice Direction, the court certified that though this was an application for leave, it could be cited: ‘the reference in CPR 52.13(2)(a) to ‘an important point of principle or practice’ is to an important point of principle or practice that … Continue reading Uphill v BRB (Residuary) Ltd: CA 3 Feb 2005
Parties appealed from decisions of the Trade Marks Registry, and requested leave to introduce new evidence. Held: It was not agreed what rules applied on appeals under the 1938 Act. The Trade Mark system had public interest effects as well as private law. The rules governing appeals were therefore different from other regimes. The courts … Continue reading E I Du Pont de Nemours and Co v S T Dupont (1): ChD 31 Oct 2002
Renewed application for leave to appeal: ‘Quite how securely the door to the Court of Appeal should be shut by narrowly confining CPR 52.13(2)(a) to new points or principle, and precisely what the interrelationship is between (2)(a) and (2)(b), are matters which may need to be subject to further and fuller argument if this Court … Continue reading Brown and Brown v Fenwick: CA 4 Oct 2001
The applicant sought leave to appeal against a decision of the Competition Commission Appeals Tribunal. Held: Since the decision of the tribunal did not involve questions of law, it fell exactly within the Cooke case, and the court should be reluctant to review a tribunal practicing as expert in an area for which it had … Continue reading Napp Pharmaceutical Holdings Ltd v Director General of Fair Trading: CA 8 May 2002
The claimant renewed her application for leave to appeal, but had first asked the judge to recuse himself for apparent bias having already expressd an opinion on the papers submitted. Held: Reconsideration by the same judge who had refused leave on the papers was part of the system. Applying Kheino, parties who did not bring … Continue reading Rezvi v Air Canada: CA 14 Feb 2002
A renewed application for leave to appeal was made as regards a valuation element of the judgment. New expert evidence was sought to be admitted. Held: Leave was refused: ‘the Court of Appeal should be particularly cautious where what is intended is to put in, in effect, further cross-examination of a witness, including an expert, … Continue reading Riyad Bank and others v Ahli United Bank (Uk) Plc: CA 23 Nov 2005
Citations:  EWCA Civ 134, (2001) 33 HLR 70,  CP Rep 70 Links: Bailii Statutes: Access to Justice Act 1999 54, Civil Procedure Rules 52 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Housing, Litigation Practice Updated: 18 June 2022; Ref: scu.217917
There was a boundary dispute. The judge in the County Court had made an error. Counsel had offered to apply to amend the order under the slip rule, and therefore the judge had refused leave to appeal. Held: This was an application for leave to apply for a second appeal, and such appeals only very … Continue reading Markos v Goodfellow and Barke and Barke: CA 26 Jul 2001
The court handed down a New Practice Direction 52 for grounds of appeal, decisions in permissions to appeal, notices to respondents of appeals, appeal bundles etc. Judges: Mr Justice Brooke Lord Justice Mance Lord Justice Dyson Citations:  EWCA (Civ) 835, Times 08-Jul-2004,  CP Rep 2,  1 Costs LR 18 Links: Bailii Statutes: … Continue reading Scribes West Limited v Relsa Anstalt and Another (No 1): CA 1 Jul 2004
The claimant had been awarded damages for sex discrimination, including a sum of andpound;25,000 for injury to feelings. The respondent appealed. Held: The Court of Appeal looked to see whether there had been an error of law in the employment tribunal decision. It did not look to see whether the Employment Appeal Tribunal had erred … Continue reading Vento v The Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police (No 2): CA 20 Dec 2002
The claimant wanted to appeal an order to pay the defendants’ costs already ordered, and to provide security for costs of the remaining action. The defendants requested security for the costs of the appeal. Throughout the matter the claimant had been inconsistent about his residence and connections with the UK. The claimant had been late … Continue reading Mohamad Ali Aoun v Hassan Bahri, Costas Angelou: CA 31 Jul 2002
The appellant had applied for leave to appeal to a single judge, who had refused the application. He appealed and was granted leave by two judges. He then objected when the single judge who had refused leave was included in the panel of judges to hear the substantive appeal. Held: There was no reason to … Continue reading Sengupta v Holmes and Others, Lord Chancellor intervening: CA 31 Jul 2002
The first defendant appealed a judgement that it was responsible to the claimant for a loan taken out by the second defendant, one of its shareholders. He had said it was for the company, and he had been found not personally responsible. Land had been purchased in the second defendant’s name, he said, only for … Continue reading Dennis Pritchard Evans v Tiger Investments Limited, David John Moore: CA 20 Feb 2002
The applicant had sought to exercise his statutory right of appeal from a decision by his professional body. The judge had considered that leave was necessary under the rules, and granted limited permission. The applicant appealed, saying that his statutory right of appeal could not be limited except by clear and specific provision. The court … Continue reading Colley v Council for Licensed Conveyancers: CA 17 Jul 2001
The claimant succeeded in an action for negligence against the respondent solicitors. The court required her to submit to a psychiatric examination to allow assessment of her claim. In default the entire action was to be stayed. She refused, and appealed, saying that her right to a fair trial had been infringed. Held: The court … Continue reading James v Baily Gibson and Co (a firm): CA 30 Oct 2002
The Solicitor’s Disciplinary Tribunal had decided that the solicitor had no case to answer. The complainant sought to appeal under the 1974 Act. Held: The proper respondent to such an appeal was the solicitor himself. The Law Society and the Tribunal were to be notified of the appeal, but were not parties to it. Judges: … Continue reading Lucas v Millman: QBD 5 Nov 2002
Judges: Lord Justice Jackson Citations:  EWCA Civ 192 Links: Bailii Statutes: Civil Procedure Rules 52.9A Jurisdiction: England and Wales Immigration, Costs Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.521624
Though the rules did not set down any timetable, it was a requirement of a proposed appellant to go ahead promptly. A reasonable time was within 14 days to apply to set aside a permission given to appeal. Judges: Clarke LJ, Richards J Citations: Times 19-Jun-2003 Statutes: Civil Procedure Rules 52.9 Jurisdiction: England and Wales … Continue reading Mamidoil-Jetoil Greek Petroleum SA v Okta Crude Oil Refinery AD: CA 4 Apr 2003
Sir Henry Brooke considered the requirements in the CPR for requesting permission to appeal: ‘When the CPR introduced a well-nigh universal regime for permission to appeal-see CPR r.52.3(1) -the rule makers introduced a tough regime in order to avoid the progress of appeals being delayed while leave to appeal was being sought from a lower … Continue reading Jackson v Marina Homes Ltd: CA 2008
Rehearing/Review – Little Difference on Appeal The appellant asked the Court to reverse a decision on the facts reached in the lower court. Held: The appeal failed (Majority decision). The court’s approach should be the same whether the case was dealt with as a rehearing or as a review. Tanfern was limited to appeals from … Continue reading Assicurazioni Generali Spa v Arab Insurance Group (BSC): CA 13 Nov 2002
The mother sought to appeal refusal of a judge to commit the father for contempt in not complying many times with court orders related to residence and contact. Held: Leave was required for such an appeal. The rules distinguished between an appeal against a committal where leave was not required, and against any other order … Continue reading M v M (Breaches of orders: Committal): CA 28 Jul 2005
The Court considered the rights or otherwise of appealing to the Court of Appeal in Patents cases. Kitchin, Floyd LJJ  EWCA Civ 1296 Bailii Civil Procedure Rules 52.3(6) England and Wales Litigation Practice, Intellectual Property Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572422
Application for permission to appeal. Jackson J considered whether permission to appeal should have been requested at the hearing: ‘It seems to me that I have got to interpret the provisions of Rule 52.3 and the provisions of the Practice Direction in a manner which is obviously consonant with the intentions of those who drafted … Continue reading Multiplex Construction (Uk) Ltd v Honeywell Control Systems Ltd: TCC 8 Feb 2007
Request for order imposing conditions on appeal. Rimer,MvFarlane LJJ  EWCA Civ 532 Bailii Civil Procedure Rules 52.9(1)(c) England and Wales Litigation Practice Updated: 19 January 2022; Ref: scu.566846
Where the sole substantial issue was that the court of first instance had failed to give reasons for its decision, it would normally be wrong for an appellate court to order a rehearing rather than a review. This might be appropriate if the court below had been asked and had refused to give reasons, or … Continue reading Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Lewis and Another: ChD 19 Jul 2001
The former practice in ancillary relief applications where a circuit judge hearing an appeal from a district judge could admit new evidence and hear the case de novo should not survive the new rules, and should cease. An appeal to the circuit judge is not a re-hearing but a review of the exercise of the … Continue reading Cordle v Cordle: CA 15 Nov 2001
Use at time of grant was determinative The parties disputed the use of a covered right of way between their properties. One property had been converted to use as a bar, and opened the rear as a beer garden with customers using the passage. The neighbours said that the right of was was limited with … Continue reading Greatorex v Newman and Another: CA 2 Dec 2008
The claimant applied for judicial review of a decision of a Magistrates Court to convict her of driving with excess alcohol. The grounds were that the district judge acted unlawfully in proceeding with the trial without disclosure by the prosecution of CCTV film of the custody suite. The court had refused permission to proceed with … Continue reading Imbeah, Regina (on The Application of) v Willesden Magistrates’ Court and Another: QBD 14 Jul 2016
One of the parties wanted to request permission to appeal, but had not done so at the hearing. The court considered whether it had power to do so at a later hearing. Held: It did not. The Rules set out a deliberately prescriptive regime which the court must follow. Once the hearing was concluded, the … Continue reading In re Stanford International Bank Ltd and Others: ChD 9 Jul 2009
The parties had been involved in an arbitration. The claimant sought leave to appeal. The judge refused to give leave, but did not say exactly why.
Held: Human Rights law required a right of appeal. That right could only be exercised properly . .
The claimant had been convicted in 2005 of an offence under the 1984 Act. It later became clear that the Act failed properly to implement a European Directive and was unenforceable. The company now sought leave to appeal out of time. The case was . .
The court gave guidance on the practice and procedure on second appeals. . .
The claimant had rejected satellite antennae it had bought from the defendants, and sought damages. The defendant said the English court did not have jurisdiction, since the order terms contained an exclusive jurisdiction clause. The claimant sought . .
The claimant estate agents appealed dismissal of their claim for commission. The owners were splitting up, and there was to begin with no clear instruction to market the property. Later the property was sold privately, but to a buyer introduced by . .
The respondent sought to appeal. The claimant requested the court to order that as a pre-condition of being allowed to appeal, the respondent should pay into court, or give adequate security for, the costs awarded at first instance, even though . .
Applications for trade marks on behalf of the claimant had been rejected. Acquired distinctiveness was a significant issue, and the question of whether the appeal was a review or a rehearing was significant. In this appeal, the parties had given . .
The applicant had been sentenced to nine months imprisonment for having broken his undertaking to the Court. He appealed against that sentence. The other party also sought to appeal other parts of the order.
Held: An appeal limited to the . .
Concerning challenges to leave to appeal: ‘(if) the Judge was misled by an Appellant, not necessarily deliberately, into giving permission to appeal, that may well be a compelling reason within the Rule. It must . . involve showing (a) that the . .
The parties were to appeal a finding of professional negligence. Leave had been given and it was suggested that the judge make additional findings of fact to assist the appeal court. . .
Leave to appeal was sought against a judge’s finding that he had no jurisdiction to hear an application for leave to appeal against another order itself refusing leave to appeal against a case management decision. The party had declined to make any . .
The appellant sought to appeal a striking out of her complaint of race discrimination. She appealed from the Employment Appeal Tribunal which had rejected her appeal in its preliminary hearing procedure.
Held: The Court of Appeal had the power . .
Application for reconsideration of refusal of leave to appeal. . .
At first instance the appellant had dishonestly assisted another party to defraud the respondent, and ordered payment of substantial damages. The defendant, non-resident, sought to appeal, and the respondent asked the court to order payment into . .
The court considered the significance of CPR 52.13(2): ‘The restriction on second appeals is important because Parliament has made it clear that it wishes pretrial disputes in civil litigation to be dealt with, on the whole, at a level lower than . .
The defendant appealed awards against it of disturbance payments to the claimants under their contracts of employment. The claimants had produced documents at the last minute before the trial but it was arguable that since these documents were those . .
The defendants had succeeded in an application before the Land Registry adjudicator for a strip of land adjoining their property to be registered in their name after a finding that they had successfully established a claim by adverse possession. The . .
A party had been refused leave to appeal against an arbitration under the Act by the judge, but later obtained leave to appeal.
Held: Such leave could only be granted by the trial judge, and the Court of Appeal could set aside the leave . .
Application for permission to appeal against the refusal by Cutts J of permission to apply for judicial review. . .
The court considered an appeal against an award under the 1996 Act. The appeal had been brought under Part 8 of the Civil Procedure Rules. Held: The appeal was by virtue of the 1996 Act, and as such was a statutory appeal, and should have been brought under Part 52, not Part 8. Judges: Sir … Continue reading Zissis v Lukomski and Another: CA 5 Apr 2006
The court considered the effect of negotiations on costs claims: ‘Changes were made to the Rules of Court. Some of these changes, and in particular the provisions of Sections II to V of CPR45, were introduced following ‘industry wide’ discussions under the aegis of the Civil Justice Council. Agreement was reached on the recoverable costs … Continue reading Butt v Nizami: QBD 9 Feb 2006
The claimant licensee alleged that the license contract had been repudiated by the defendant licensor. The claimant succeeded at the trial of liability. The defendant had made a payment into court. The judge was told of the payment but not of the amount. He ordered the defendant to pay the costs of the liability trial … Continue reading HSS Hire Services Group Plc v BMB Builders Merchants Ltd and Another: CA 24 May 2005
The appellants appealed rejection of their application for judicial review. They were long term residents in a nursing home, which the respondents had decided to close. Held: Though the respondent did exercise some public functions, and its activities were in part paid for by public authorities, its activity of providing residential accommodation was not a … Continue reading Regina (Heather and Another) v Leonard Cheshire Foundation: CA 21 Mar 2002
The claimant wished to pursue his claim for defamation against the defendant, but was reluctant to return to the UK to give evidence, fearing arrest and extradition to the US. He appealed refusal of permission to be interviewed on video tape. Held (Majority): The appeal succeeded, and the judge’s order allowing the evidence to be … Continue reading Polanski v Conde Nast Publications Ltd: HL 10 Feb 2005
The parties had been involved in a bitter and protracted boundary dispute. The judge had found a minimal encroachment, and awarded nominal damages. He had made an error in the order. At an appeal counsel was given leave to apply to amend the oder under the slip rule (r40.12). Held: The amendment was not the … Continue reading Markos v Goodfellow and others: CA 30 Nov 2001
The newspaper applied for leave to access documents referred to but not released during the course of extradition proceedings in open court. Held: The application was to be allowed. Though extradition proceedings were not governed by the Civil Procedure Rules, wider principles still applied. The open justice principle is a constitutional principle to be found … Continue reading Guardian News and Media Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court: CA 3 Apr 2012
Presumption in Favour of Open Proceedings There had been an unauthorised dissemination by the petitioner to third parties of the official shorthand writer’s notes of a nullity suit which had been heard in camera. An application was made for a committal for contempt. Held: The House equated the contempt to a breach of an injunction … Continue reading Scott v Scott: HL 5 May 1913
The court considered whether there had been effective service of proceedings on defendants in Turkey. Evidence was given as to the effectiveness of such service in Turkish law. Held: The defendant’s application to set aside the judgment in default succeeded. The claimant’s applications in respect of CPR 3.10 and CPR 6.9 were refused. The Civil … Continue reading Basil Shiblaq v Kahraman Sadikoglu (No 2): ComC 30 Jul 2004
The claimant had issued proceedings in time, but then the limitation period expired before it was served, and in the meantime the limitation period had expired. The defendant appealed against an automatic extension of time for service granted to the claimant. Held: The Rules should generally be interpreted without reference to case law under the … Continue reading Hashtroodi v Hancock: CA 27 May 2004
The appellant police officers and others were defendants in an action for defamation. They appealed a refusal of a trial of the preliminary issue as to whether they had the benefit of qualified privilege. They said that recent case law (GKR Karate and Loutchansky) had established a rule to that effect. Held: The cases did … Continue reading MacIntyre v Phillips and Others: CA 24 Jul 2001
In an request for pre-action discovery it was plainly wrong for the court to seek to decide in advance any element of the virtues of the case. Held: The appeal should be allowed. The case was arguable and should be allowed to proceed.Peter Gibson LJ said: ‘We have reservations about the approach adopted by the … Continue reading Rose v Lynx Express Ltd. and Bridgepoint Capital (Nominees) Ltd: CA 7 Apr 2004
The judge allowed the defendant’s submission of no case to answer without putting them to their election and again the claimant’s appeal succeeded. The trial judge had been persuaded that the rule in Alexander -v- Rayson had been altered by the Civil Procedure Rules ‘and that as a general rule a judge was not required … Continue reading Lloyd v John Lewis Partnership: CA 1 Jul 2001
The applicant had been sentenced to detention during Her Majesty’s Pleasure. He sought a judicial review of the Lord Chief Justice’s recommendation to the Home Secretary for the minimum term he was to serve. Held: In exercising this function, the LCJ was acting in a judicial capacity, and therefore his recommendation was not subject to … Continue reading Regina (on the Application of Dudson) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and the Lord Chief Justice: Admn 21 Nov 2003
In each case claims had been late in being served and extensions in time were sought and refused. Held: The recent authorities were examined. The words ‘has been unable to serve’ in CPR 7.6(3)(a) include all cases where the court has failed to serve, including mere oversight. The court’s discretion might then be exercised according … Continue reading Cranfield and Another v Bridgegrove Ltd; Claussen v Yeates etc: CA 14 May 2003
The defendant firm of solicitors appealed an order for costs against it based upon a percentage calculation. They sought an issues based costs order. Held: Where there was insufficient information upon which to calculate an issues based costs order, it could be appropriate to make a percentage based order under subsection (f). Whilst issues based … Continue reading Budgen v Andrew Gardner Partnership: CA 31 Jul 2002
The applicant sought to appeal a refusal to grant him permission to renew an oral application for leave to appeal. The respondent had appeared at the initial unsuccessful application, and had been awarded costs although there appeared to be no provision for their appearance. Held: The Rules contained inconsistencies, and needed clarification. The Court of … Continue reading Jolly v Jay and Another: CA 7 Mar 2002
The court has a power to order substitution of a party though the limitation period, and even the ‘long stop’ limitation period had expired. The claimant child sought damages after a vaccination. The batch had been attributed to the wrong manufacturer, and the error only came to light outside the limitation period. It was said … Continue reading Horne-Roberts (a Child) v Smithkline Beecham plc and Another: CA 18 Dec 2001
The claimant journalist sought disclosure of papers acquired by the respondent in its conduct of enquiries into the charitable Mariam appeal. The Commission referred to an absolute exemption under section 32(2) of the 2000 Act, saying that the exemption continued until the papers were destroyed, or for 20 years under the 1958 Act. Held: The … Continue reading Kennedy v The Charity Commission: SC 26 Mar 2014
In a medical negligence case, the court ordered a pre-trial private meeting between the expert witnesses for the claimant and defendant. The claimant objected, fearing that pressure would be brought on his professional witness by his colleagues, thus denying him a fair trial under article 6. Held: The aim of the experts’ meeting was to … Continue reading Hubbard and Others v Lambeth Southwark and Lewisham Health Authority and Others: CA 7 Sep 2001
Referring to the new Civil Procedure Rules: ‘These guidelines … create an entirely new climate in which the court is required to examine the plaintiff’s conduct by reference to the overall interests of justice and fairness (including considerations of public importance reflecting the interests of other litigants, and the interests of the court, to ensure … Continue reading Lace Co-Ordinates Ltd v Nem Insurance Co Ltd: CA 19 Nov 1998
‘The appeal concerns the operation of the qualified one-way costs shifting regime (known as ‘QOCS’) contained in Section II of Part 44 of the Civil Procedure Rules (‘CPR’). The Judge decided that QOCS applied, automatically, to protect Ms Brown against any adverse costs order which might be made against her in the Police’s favour. The … Continue reading Police of The Metropolis v Brown: QBD 31 Jul 2018
The court gave detailed guidance on the application of the new procedures on civil appeals in private law cases introduced on May 2. Appeals from a County Court District Judge’s final decision in a multi-track case could now go straight to the Court of Appeal. Appeals will generally be subject to leave being obtained. An … Continue reading Tanfern Ltd v Cameron-MacDonald, Cameron-MacDonald: CA 12 May 2000
When looking at an application to strike out a claim, the normal ‘balance of probabilities’ standard of proof did not apply. It was the court’s task to assess whether, even if supplemented by evidence at trial, the claimant’s claim was bound to fail and even if unchallenged. The court could look to witness statements to … Continue reading The Royal Brompton Hospital National Health Service Trust v Hammond and Others (No 5): CA 11 Apr 2001
The third defendant sought an order that the costs of the claim for an injunction against him, once it was discontinued on the second day of trial, should be assessed on an indemnity basis. Held: The order should be made. The power of the court under Rule 38.6 to ‘order otherwise’ clearly includes power, in … Continue reading Atlantic Bar and Grill Ltd v Posthouse Hotels Ltd: 2000
The claimants sought damages for injuries alleged to have been received at the hands of prison officers whilst in prison. They now sought disclosure by the police of statements made to the police during the course of their investigation. Held: The court ordered the police to disclose witness statements obtained during a criminal investigation, because … Continue reading Frankson and Others v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Johns v Same: CA 8 May 2003
After a judgment the parties sought to appeal. Held: The judge had failed to make a finding on a critical issue in the case, namely whether or not the mother of the child concerned had ‘even if prompted only at a subconscious level, nevertheless deliberately engaged in alienation.’ Whilst some circumstances might require an application … Continue reading In re T (a Child) (Contact: Alienation: Permission to Appeal): CA 24 Oct 2002
Where a judge, on an oral application, gave leave to appeal, but limited it to certain issues, it was not for the party on the later substantive appeal to try again to re-open issues which that judge had considered and excluded. Once leave to appeal had been granted after first written and then oral submissions, … Continue reading Fieldman and Another v Markovitch and Another: CA 4 Jul 2001
The new Civil Procedure Rules were ultra vires and invalid insofar as they purported to remove any right of a solicitor’s client to assert his right of confidence as against his solicitor. The solicitor was therefore unable in this case to defend himself against a wasted costs order, but the court could allow for the … Continue reading General Mediterranean Holdings SA v Patel and Another: QBD 19 Jul 1999
With the new Civil Procedure Rules, it was no longer correct that a court could not exclude evidence which was relevant, on the grounds that its probative value was outweighed by its prejudicial effect. The court now has full power and discretion to make such orders. ‘The just resolution of this case depends on the … Continue reading Grobbelaar v Sun Newspapers Ltd: CA 9 Jul 1999
Sumner J gave guidance on the withdrawal of an admission under the CPR: ‘From the cases and the CPR I draw the following principals:1. In exercising its discretion, the court will consider all the circumstances of the case and seek to give effect to the overriding objective.2. Among the matters to be considered will be:(a) … Continue reading Braybrook v The Basildon and Thurrock University NHS Trust: 7 Oct 2004
The respondent appealed against a finding that the provision which made a loan agreement completely invalid for lack of compliance with the 1974 Act was itself invalid under the Human Rights Act since it deprived the respondent lender of its property rights. It was also argued that it was not possible to make a declaration … Continue reading Wilson v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry; Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (No 2): HL 10 Jul 2003
The applicant sought to appeal against findings of professional misconduct as a nurse. Held: Buckley J set out what was meant by a rehearing within the rules governing the Council’s disciplinary procedures: ‘Rehearing is to be understood as it is under Order 59 which governs appeals to the Court of Appeal when exercising its civil … Continue reading Regina v The Professional Conduct Committee of the United Kingdom Central Council ex parte Wood and Thompson: Admn 19 Feb 1993
The Chairman of the Industrial Tribunal had struck out the employers’ Notice of Appearance for failure to comply with an order for particulars. Hld: The employers’ appeal to the EAT was dismissed. The court considered a strike out of an application before the Industrial Tribunal: ‘The striking-out of the entire notice of appearance was indeed … Continue reading Medallion Holidays Ltd v Birch: 1985
An asylum seeker had been wrongly accused of riot and sought to sue for damages for malicious prosecution. The Home Secretary, a possible defendant in that action decided to expel the failed asylum seeker. Held: Such an action was in breach of the principle of equality of arms enshrined in the treaty, and deprived the … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex Parte Quaquah: QBD 20 Jan 2000
Presumption of Damage in Defamation is rebuttable The defendant complained that the presumption in English law that the victim of a libel had suffered damage was incompatible with his right to a fair trial. They said the statements complained of were repetitions of statements made by US authorities. The claimant had asserted that no more … Continue reading Dow Jones and Co Inc v Jameel: CA 3 Feb 2005
The parties were involved in litigation under the 1976 Act. The claiant now appealed against an order penalising him for failing to provide a costs budget. He said that it had not been a case management conference at which one was to be filed. Judges: Hickinbottom J Citations:  EWHC 1037 (Ch),  WLR(D) 168 … Continue reading Kershaw v Roberts (Representative of The Estate of Jones) and Another: ChD 10 Apr 2014
The claimant anti-asbestos campaigners complained that the defendant investigators had infringed their various rights of privacy. They now sought discovery to support the claim. Held: the contents of the witness statements do show that it is more than speculative that these Claimants could, if their recollection was prompted by seeing documents, formulate a claim with … Continue reading Bains and Others v Moore and Others: QBD 15 Feb 2017
The claimants alleged negligence causing them personal injury and other losses arising from pollution from mining operations of the defendants in Zambia. The company denied jurisdiction. In the Court of Appeal the defendants’ appeals were dismissed. Held: The appeals failed save that the UK was not the proper jurisdiction to bring the case. The claim … Continue reading Vedanta Resources Plc and Another v Lungowe and Others: SC 10 Apr 2019
The court considered whether it had jurisdiction to apply the Rules to extend time to appeal against discharge of an extradition request. The notice of appeal was not filed (or served) within seven days. Held: Latham LJ said: ‘I acknowledge the force of this argument. But it begs the question as to what power the … Continue reading Vilnius City, the District Court of v Barcys: Admn 22 Mar 2007
No collateral attack on Jury findigs. An attempt was made to open up in a civil action, allegations of assaults by the police prior to the making of confessions which had been disposed of in a voir dire in the course of a criminal trial. The plaintiffs had imprisoned having spent many years after conviction … Continue reading Hunter v Chief Constable of the West Midlands Police: HL 19 Nov 1981
Balancing Rights of Prisoner and Society The appellant had been convicted of the murder of three police officers in 1966. His tariff of thirty years had now long expired. He complained that material put before the Parole Board reviewing has case had not been disclosed to him. Held: The appeal failed (by a majority). The … Continue reading Roberts v Parole Board: HL 7 Jul 2005
Power to call in is administrative in nature The powers of the Secretary of State to call in a planning application for his decision, and certain other planning powers, were essentially an administrative power, and not a judicial one, and therefore it was not a breach of the applicants’ rights to a fair hearing before … Continue reading Regina (Holding and Barnes plc) v Secretary of State for Environment Transport and the Regions; Regina (Alconbury Developments Ltd and Others) v Same and Others: HL 9 May 2001
Reconsideration of a dismissal order dated 19 February 2016 dismissing an appellant’s notice for failure to comply with the Civil Procedure Rules Practice Direction 52C. Meacher M  EWCA Civ 380 Bailii England and Wales Litigation Practice Updated: 14 January 2022; Ref: scu.563246
The defendant sought leave to bring proceedings for contempt of court against the claimant saying that she had had no honest belief in the matters deposed in her statement of truth, in that she had substantially exaggerated her injuries. Held: Leave was granted. The court approached the application on the basis ‘that the discretion to … Continue reading Kirk v Walton: QBD 24 Jul 2008
Mr Seal noisily objected to a neighbour blocking in his car. Police were called who took him into custody under the 1983 Act. He was released several days later, and eventually sought damages for his wrongful treatment. He had failed to first seek permission from the court as was required by s139(2). Held: The appeal … Continue reading Seal v Chief Constable of South Wales Police: CA 19 May 2005
In each case the local authority sought to recover possession of its own land. In the Lambeth case, they asserted this right as against an overstaying former tenant, and in the Leeds case as against gypsies. In each case the occupiers said that the recovery of possession interfered with their right respect for their family … Continue reading Kay and Another v London Borough of Lambeth and others; Leeds City Council v Price and others and others: HL 8 Mar 2006
A prison policy requiring prisoners not to be present when their property was searched and their mail was examined was unlawful. The policy had been introduced after failures in search procedures where officers had been intimidated by the presence of prisoners. Particularly when examining documents subject to legal professional privilege, the rules did not allow … Continue reading Regina (Daly) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 23 May 2001
The union appellant challenged the validity of the imposition of fees on those seeking to lay complaints in the Employment Tribunal system. Held: The appeal succeeded. The fees were discriminatory and restricted access to justice. The consequence of the order had been very substantially to reduce the number of cases coming before the tribunal, and: … Continue reading Unison, Regina (on The Application of) v Lord Chancellor: SC 26 Jul 2017