Balmoral Group Ltd v Borealis (UK) Ltd and others: ComC 23 Aug 2006

Whether court had jurisdiction to hear application for permission to appeal. Clarke J said: ‘the rules provide for the lower court to be able to grant permission at the hearing at which the decision to be appealed was made. On the facts of this case, the hearing at which the decision sought to be appealed was made was, as it seems to me, concluded on 25th July. Whilst it would have been open to Balmoral to apply for an adjournment of that hearing so as to enable them to make an application for permission to appeal before it ended, it did not do so. Since that hearing is over I regard myself as no longer able to grant permission. The rules provide a would-be appellant with a choice. He can apply to the lower court when the decision is made. If he needs more time he can ask for an adjournment of the hearing at which the decision is made in order to apply for permission on the date to which that hearing is adjourned. His subsequent application will then, by definition, be made at the adjournment of that hearing. If he does neither he must apply to the appeal court.’


Christopher Clarke J


[2006] EWHC 2228 (Comm)




England and Wales


See AlsoBalmoral Group Ltd v Borealis [UK] Ltd and others ComC 25-Jul-2006
The claimants manufactured and sold storage tanks. They sought substantial damages after chemical materials purchased from the defendants to help bond the tanks failed. . .

Cited by:

CitedIn re Stanford International Bank Ltd and Others ChD 9-Jul-2009
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.245194