Omega Engineering Inc v Omega SA: ChD 20 May 2003

An ‘unless’ order had been agreed between the parties, but the order had not allowed for what would happen if either party sought permission to appeal. The respondent argued that the claimant could not have an extension of time pending the outcome of his application for permission, saying that the court was now functus officio.
Held: It is not normally permissible to look back on the old Rules of the Supreme Court when interpreting the new CPR. A stay could be allowed in this case. First, given the overriding objective, it was felt unlikely that the new rule was intended to be more strict than under the former rule, which would allow a stay. The power to extend time did not come to an end wit hth edrawing and entry of the order.


Pumfrey J


Times 29-Sep-2003


Civil Procedure Rules 3.12(a)


England and Wales

Civil Procedure Rules

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.186461