Jackson v Marina Homes
Ltd [2007] EWCA Civ 1404, LisleMainwaring v Associated Newspapers [2018] EWCA Civ 1470 and R (Hysaj) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] EWCA Civ 1633. He then provided a summary headed “The Correct Procedure” at paragraph 21 (the emphases in bold are mine; that in italics (as well as bold) is original):
“[21] It is the experience of the court that the effect of the rules, as expounded in the authorities referred to above, is often not properly understood by would-be appellants. We think there is value in our summarising in this judgment the effect of those authorities and the procedure that ought to be followed in consequence by parties wishing to seek permission to appeal from the lower court (which is good practice though not mandatory). We would set the position out as follows:
(1)
The date of the decision for the purposes of CPR r 52.12 is the date of the hearing at which the decision is given, which may be ex tempore or by the formal hand down of a reserved judgment: see
Sayers v Clarke
and
Owusu v Jackson
. We call this the decision hearing.
(2)
A party who wishes to apply to the lower court for permission to appeal should normally do so at the decision hearing itself.
In the case of a formal hand down where counsel have been excused from attendance that can be done by applying in writing prior to the hearing.
The judge will usually be able to give his or her decision at the hearing, but there may be occasions where further submissions and/or time for reflection are required, in which case the permission decision may post-date the decision hearing.
(3)
If a party is not ready to make an application at the decision hearing it is necessary to ask for the hearing to be formally adjourned in order to give them more time to do so: see
Jackson v Marina Homes
.
The judge, if he or she agrees to the adjournment, will no doubt set a timetable for written submissions and will normally decide the question on the papers without the need for a further hearing.
- Introduction
- The rule
- The Claimant’s arguments on the Covid Protocol
- Create Financial
- McDonald v Rose
- In the case of a formal hand down where counsel have been excused from attendance that can be done by applying in writing prior to the hearing.
- Jackson v Marina Homes
- As long as the decision hearing has been formally adjourned, any such application can be treated as having been made ‘at’ it for the purpose of CPR r 52.3(2)(a).
- LisleMainwaring
- also
- Hysaj
- Conclusion
