Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
John Brisby KC and Karl Anderson (instructed by Carter Lemon Camerons LLP) for the Claimant David Joseph KC (instructed by Gunnercooke LLP) for the Defendant Hearing dates: 22 November, 12 December 2024 ____________________
(i) by s.69(6) of the 1996 Act, " The leave of the court is required for any appeal from a decision of the court under this section to grant or refuse leave to appeal ";
(ii) by s.68(4) of that Act, " The leave of the court is required for any appeal from a decision of the court under this section "; and
(iii) it is well established that those provisions mean what they say, namely that only the court deciding to grant or refuse leave to appeal or to uphold or dismiss a serious irregularity claim, respectively, may grant leave to appeal, such that in the present case the Court of Appeal (as prospective appeal court) cannot grant leave.
(ii) an extension of " [t]he time for the Claimant to apply for permission to appeal [the refusal of leave to appeal in the s.69 claim], pursuant to s.69(6) Arbitration Act 1996 ", until 21 days after the final determination of the s.68 claim.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.