A delay of 22 months between a hearing and the handing down of a judgment is quite intolerable. Judges creating such delays will in future be liable to such steps as could properly be taken by those in authority over them. Mechanisms had been put in place to alert judges with responsibility for supervising the delivery of judgments by other judges about delays so that they could take appropriate steps to prevent delays.
Judges:
Lord Woolf MR
Citations:
Gazette 18-Nov-1998, Times 22-Oct-1998, [1998] EWCA Civ 1574
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – Goose v Wilson Sandford and Co and Mainon CA 13-Feb-1998
A judge was properly criticised for failing to write up a judgment when the witness’ evidence was still fresh in his mind. A two year delay required a re-trial.
Peter Gibson LJ explained the potential effect of delay on the formulation and . .
Cited by:
Cited – Olwa v North Glasgow University Hospitals NHS Trust, McGinley EAT 22-Mar-2004
EAT Race Discrimination – Direct
EAT Race Discrimination – Direct . .
Cited – Kwamin v Abbey National Plc; Birminingham City Council v Mtize; Martin v London Borough of Southwark; Connex South Eastern Ltd vBangs EAT 9-Feb-2004
EAT Practice and Procedure – Appellate jurisdiction/Reasons/Burns-Barke.
Four cases of delay in promulgation of ET decisions. Three allowed (7.5 months, 12 months, 14.5 months) and one dismissed (4 months). . .
Cited – Bond v Dunster Properties Ltd and Others CA 21-Apr-2011
The defendant appealed against the judge’s findings as to fact delivered some 22 months after the hearing.
Held: The appeal failed. Though such a delay must require the court carefully to investigate the judgment, it did not of itself . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Litigation Practice
Updated: 25 November 2022; Ref: scu.80745