Harun Miah v Amir Uddin Ahmed

Harun Miah v Amir Uddin Ahmed

The trial judge erred by refusing the adjournment based on an incorrect application of Covid-19 guidance and by failing to consider the possibility of a remote hearing. The decision to proceed fell outside the range of reasonable responses open to the judge in the circumstances.

Parties
Appellant/defendant: Harun Miah; Respondent/claimant: Amir Uddin Ahmed
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Trial Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Adjournment of Trial, Covid 19 and Court Procedure, Binding Agreements, Arbitration Agreements
Civil Procedure Adjournment of Trial Covid 19 and Court Procedure Binding Agreements Arbitration Agreements

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Harun Miah

Appellant/defendant

Amir Uddin Ahmed

Respondent/claimant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Trial Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in refusing an adjournment due to Covid-19 symptoms and change of legal representation
  2. 2 Whether the 2018 Agreement was binding
  3. 3 Whether the judge applied the correct test for adjournment

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge erred by refusing the adjournment based on an incorrect application of Covid-19 guidance and by failing to consider the possibility of a remote hearing. The decision to proceed fell outside the range of reasonable responses open to the judge in the circumstances.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order of HHJ Lethem set aside
  • Matter remitted to the County Court for rehearing before a different judge