In re Claims Direct Test Cases: CA 19 Mar 2002

The applicants sought to appeal on two matters where they had questions of practice in the conduct of personal injury claims. These were as to whether after-the-event cover purchased under section 29 amounted to insurance premiums, and the setting of how much was a reasonable sum to be recovered in such cases.
Held: The Court of Appeal could only answer appeals from judgements. Its jurisdiction is appellate, and it was not appropriate to seek to deal with matters which had not yet been decided at first instance.

Judges:

Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, Master of the Rolls, Lord Justice Potter and Lady Justice Arden

Citations:

Times 04-Apr-2002, Gazette 03-Apr-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 333

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Access to Justice Act 1999 29

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedStreet v Mountford HL 6-Mar-1985
When a licence is really a tenancy
The document signed by the occupier stated that she understood that she had been given a licence, and that she understood that she had not been granted a tenancy protected under the Rent Acts. Exclusive occupation was in fact granted.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs, Insurance, Personal Injury

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.168119