header-logo header-logo

Jurisdiction—Appeal from decision of judge to which leapfrog certificate relates

31 May 2007
Issue: 7275 / Categories: Case law , Law reports
printer mail-detail

R (on the application of Jones and others) v Ceredigion County Council [2007] UKHL 24, [2007] All ER (D) 380 (May)

House of Lords

Lord Bingham, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Scott, Lord Mance and Lord Neuberger.

23 May 2007

The words “decision of the judge to which the certificate relates” in s 13(2)(a) of the Administration of Justice Act 1969 (AJA 1969) is limited to a decision in respect of which the House of Lords has granted permission for an appeal.

Andrew Nicol QC and Nicholas Bowen (instructed by Russell Jones & Walker) for the claimants.
Nigel Giffin QC and Jane McCafferty (instructed by Sharpe Pritchard) for the authority.

The claimants applied for judicial review of a decision of a non-statutory panel of the defendant local authority. Two issues arose on the application. The claimants had to succeed on both in order to quash the decision.
The judge ruled in favour of the claimants and granted the defendant permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal. Counsel also applied for a certificate

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Kingsley Napley—Claire Green

Kingsley Napley—Claire Green

Firm announces appointment of chief legal officer

Weightmans—Emma Eccles & Mark Woodall

Weightmans—Emma Eccles & Mark Woodall

Firm bolsters Manchester insurance practice with double partner appointment

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Partner joins family law team inLondon

NEWS
The threat of section 21 ‘no fault’ eviction was banished this week, after the Renters’ Rights Act 2025 passed into law
Limited liability partnerships (LLPs) are reportedly in the firing line in Chancellor Rachel Reeves upcoming Autumn budget
The landmark Supreme Court’s decision in Johnson v FirstRand Bank Ltd—along with Rukhadze v Recovery Partners—redefine fiduciary duties in commercial fraud. Writing in NLJ this week, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley analyses the implications of the rulings
Barristers Ben Keith of 5 St Andrew’s Hill and Rhys Davies of Temple Garden Chambers use the arrest of Simon Leviev—the so-called Tinder Swindler—to explore the realities of Interpol red notices, in this week's NLJ
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys [2025] has upended assumptions about who may conduct litigation, warn Kevin Latham and Fraser Barnstaple of Kings Chambers in this week's NLJ. But is it as catastrophic as first feared?
back-to-top-scroll