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 agreed that interpreting the rules to impose a general provision requiring leave to appeal would produce inconsistency, and could only be done with some interpolation: ‘ The wording of Rule 52.3(1)(b), in particular the words in parenthesis, is more consistent with the requirement that the Practice Direction should make specific provision for specific appeals; and this Practice Direction does not do so’ (Sir Andrew Morritt VC).
Judges:
Morritt VC, May LJ, Dyson LJ
Citations:
Times 06-Aug-2001, Gazette 31-Aug-2001, [2001] EWCA Civ 1137, [2002] 1WLR 160
Links:
Statutes:
Civil Procedure Rules 52.3(1)(b), Administration of Justice Act 1985 267
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Colley v Council for Licensed Conveyancers CA 14-Feb-2001
Directions for lodging of further argument . .
Cited by:
Cited – In re MB (A Patient) (Court of Protection: Appeal) CA 1-Nov-2005
The applicant appealed an order that a statutory will be executed for the patient, who suffered from Alzheimer’s disease. The will substituted a solicitor for the applicant as executor, and made technical improvements. The court considered its . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Civil Procedure Rules, Legal Professions
Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147619
