[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions >> Daryanani v Kumar & Co (A Firm) [2001] EWCA Civ 1648 (31 October 2001) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2001/1648.html Cite as: [2001] EWCA Civ 1648

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE
COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
(HIS HONOUR JUDGE HICKS, Sitting as a Judge of the High Court)

		Royal Courts of Justice Strand London WC2 Wednesday, 31st October 2001

Wednesday, 31st being October 2001

1. LORD JUSTICE RIX: This is Mr Daryanani's application for permission to appeal. I have received this morning a fax of a medical certificate which Mr Daryanani has provided, signed by Dr Verma, stating that he suffers from gastroenteritis and will be unable to attend court today. It is signed as of yesterday's date. It comes forward with a fax asking for the application to be put off for another date and asking for directions from me that the adjourned application be heard before Mantell LJ on that other date on the ground that Mantell LJ had dealt with this matter before in December 2000. I am willing to accept the medical certificate at its face value, and to accept that Mr Daryanani is unable to be present today. Therefore this application will be adjourned.
2. However, I have some concern that Mr Daryanani, who it is reported to me was on the telephone to officers of the court service in the Civil Appeals Office yesterday, is jockeying for position and wishes to influence the choice of members of the court that will hear his application. I have to say that listing of such applications before the judges of the Court of Appeal is a matter primarily for the listing office, and it is not open for litigants to choose the membership of the court which hears their applications. Since in preparation for today's hearing I, to whom it so happen that this application was assigned, have read the papers, it seems to me that as a matter of efficiency I should keep this matter to myself. The matter will come back, therefore, before me when Mr Daryanani is recovered and a new hearing is fixed.
3. In any event, for the reasons which I have briefly outlined, I am unable to accede to the request to direct that the matter should be heard before Mantell LJ.
4. I would ask that a transcript of this judgment when it is perfected should be supplied at public expense to Mr Daryanani.
(Application adjourned; no order for costs).