BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
[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 >> Richardson v Morton & Anor [2002] EWCA Civ 124 (5 February 2002) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2002/124.html Cite as: [2002] EWCA Civ 124 |
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
BRISTOL DISTRICT REGISTRY
(Mr Justice Smedley)
Strand London WC2 Tuesday 5th February, 2002 |
||
B e f o r e :
LORD JUSTICE MANTELL
LADY JUSTICE HALE
____________________
PHILIPPA CAROL RICHARDSON | ||
Claimant/Applicant | ||
- v - | ||
(1) CHRISTOPHER MORTON | ||
(2) EATON EVANS & MORRIS (A Firm) | ||
Defendants/Respondents |
____________________
Smith Bernal Reporting Limited, 190 Fleet Street,
London EC4A 2AG
Tel: 020 7421 4040
Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)
MR J VIRGO (Instructed by Messrs Eversheds, Bristol BS1 4NP) appeared on behalf of the First Respondent
MR G MANSFIELD QC (Instructed by Messrs Morgan Cole, Cardiff CF10 3DP) appeared on behalf of the Second Respondent
____________________
Crown Copyright ©
"In other words, this is a quite different context in which to apply the general principle that there must be finality in litigation. ... it is difficult to imagine circumstances more special than those which have flowed from the introduction of [the rule]."
Even then, in paragraph 7.27, the court held that an extension of time for appealing would not be given automatically. Among the factors which would strongly militate against the grant of such an extension four were lists. The first of these was any inexcusable delay in applying for an extension of time. The third was if "the respondent can demonstrate that he or his insurers have reasonably acted on the basis that the claim is at an end, and their affairs have been conducted on this basis or if prejudice has been suffered in any other way."