Ogle v Metcalfe Mather Pepper & Anor [2001] EWCA Civ 2035 (7 December 2001)

Ogle v Metcalfe Mather Pepper & Anor [2001] EWCA Civ 2035 (7 December 2001)

The Court of Appeal has no jurisdiction to entertain an appeal from a refusal by a High Court judge to grant permission to appeal, and there was no error in the judge's exercise of discretion in awarding costs against the applicant.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 2035
Parties
Claimant/applicant: Ronald Ogle; Defendant/respondent: Metcalfe Mather Pepper; Defendant/respondent: Bates Wells & Braithwaite
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 December 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal to the Court of Appeal From Refusal of Permission to Appeal by High Court Judge
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Appeals, Permission to Appeal, Jurisdiction, Costs
Civil Procedure Appeals Permission to Appeal Jurisdiction Costs

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ronald Ogle

Claimant/applicant

Metcalfe Mather Pepper

Defendant/respondent

Bates Wells & Braithwaite

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal to the Court of Appeal From Refusal of Permission to Appeal by High Court Judge

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court of Appeal has jurisdiction to hear an appeal from a refusal of permission to appeal by a High Court judge
  2. 2 Whether the order for costs against the applicant was appropriate

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal has no jurisdiction to entertain an appeal from a refusal by a High Court judge to grant permission to appeal, and there was no error in the judge's exercise of discretion in awarding costs against the applicant.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application for permission to appeal dismissed
  • No interference with the costs order made below