header-logo header-logo

08 July 2016
Issue: 7707 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Tackling delays in the Court of Appeal

nlj_7707_news2

Litigation lawyers have offered qualified support to new proposals to reduce delays in Court of Appeal hearings.

The Civil Procedure Rule Committee (CPRC) reviewed the oral and written process for applications to the Court to see where it could be streamlined, after judges sitting alone came under pressure due to an increased workload. Its proposals include raising the threshold for permission to appeal from a “real prospect” to “a substantial prospect of success”, and removing the automatic right to an oral hearing when applying for permission to appeal.

Ed Crosse, president of the London Solicitors Litigation Association (LSLA) (pictured), says: “The LSLA appreciates that significant Appeal Court time could be saved by removing the automatic right to an oral permission hearing but there will need to be appropriate safeguards to limit the risk of injustice, particularly as it is proposed that there will be no right of appeal if a permission application is dismissed on paper.

“Alternatively, the rules could be amended to increase the scope for a single judge to refuse an oral hearing because the case has ‘no realistic prospect of success’ rather than the current ‘totally without merit’ test. Judges could also limit the issues addressed by applicants in oral hearings and deliver their decisions concisely, there and then, with no right of appeal against the decision.

“We would also propose discouraging tactical or unmeritorious permission applications by imposing adverse costs orders in favour of respondents who have been forced to incur costs by having had to respond.”

Crosse said appeals are often listed for longer than necessary and the Court could free up time by taking a “tougher approach”.

Issue: 7707 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Wedlake Bell—Rebecca Christie

Wedlake Bell—Rebecca Christie

Firm welcomes partner with specialist expertise in family and art law

Birketts—Álvaro Aznar

Birketts—Álvaro Aznar

Dual-qualified partner joins international private client team

NEWS
Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
In a striking financial remedies ruling, the High Court cut a wife’s award by 40% for coercive and controlling behaviour. Writing in NLJ this week, Chris Bryden and Nicole Wallace of 4 King’s Bench Walk analyse LP v MP [2025] EWFC 473
A €60.9m award to Kylian Mbappé has refocused attention on football’s controversial ‘ethics bonus’ clauses. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law examines how such provisions sit within French labour law
A seemingly dry procedural update may prove potent. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold explains that new CPR 31.12A—part of the 193rd update—fills a ‘lacuna’ exposed in McLaren Indy v Alpa Racing
back-to-top-scroll