Tennero Ltd v Arnold [2006] EWHC 1530 (QB) (06 July 2006)

Tennero Ltd v Arnold [2006] EWHC 1530 (QB) (06 July 2006)

It is an abuse of process for a defendant to pursue an appeal against refusal of adjournment after having applied under CPR 39.3(3) to set aside judgment and failed; the proper route is to appeal the order refusing to set aside, not the original refusal to adjourn. Mr Arnold did not satisfy the requirements of CPR 39.3(5) and his appeal against Judge Cowell's order must be refused.

Citation
[2006] EWHC 1530 (QB)
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Tennero Limited; Defendant/appellant: Paul Arnold
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 July 2006
Procedural Posture
Application for Permission to Appeal / High Court Review of County Court and Procedural Decisions
Outcome
Permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Adjournment of Trial, Setting Aside Judgment, Appeals Process, CPR 39.3, Compound Interest, Fiduciary Duty
Civil Procedure Contract Law Adjournment of Trial Setting Aside Judgment Appeals Process CPR 39.3 Compound Interest Fiduciary Duty

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tennero Limited

Claimant/respondent

Paul Arnold

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Application for Permission to Appeal / High Court Review of County Court and Procedural Decisions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether it is an abuse of process to appeal refusal of adjournment after applying under CPR 39.3(3)
  2. 2 Whether the refusal to adjourn was justified
  3. 3 Whether the applicant acted promptly and had good reason for non-attendance under CPR 39.3(5)

Ratio Decidendi

It is an abuse of process for a defendant to pursue an appeal against refusal of adjournment after having applied under CPR 39.3(3) to set aside judgment and failed; the proper route is to appeal the order refusing to set aside, not the original refusal to adjourn. Mr Arnold did not satisfy the requirements of CPR 39.3(5) and his appeal against Judge Cowell's order must be refused.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • Application for permission to appeal from Judge Cowell's order refused
  • No extension of time granted