Flint v Chick & Anor [2000] EWCA Civ 397 (12 December 2000)

Flint v Chick & Anor [2000] EWCA Civ 397 (12 December 2000)

There was no important point of principle or practice, nor any compelling reason, to justify a second appeal. The applicant had the opportunity to challenge the expert evidence at trial, and any procedural disadvantages or alleged inadequacies in the expert's report were not sufficient to disturb the findings of the lower courts. The judge's exercise of discretion in refusing a retrial was reasonable and not open to challenge.

Citation
[2000] EWCA Civ 397
Parties
Defendant/applicant: John Joseph Flint; Claimant/respondent: Jonathan Peter Chick; Claimant/respondent: Stephanie Jane Chick
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 December 2000
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Second Appeal to Court of Appeal From County Court
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Boundary Disputes, Appeals, Expert Evidence, Retrial Discretion
Property Law Civil Procedure Boundary Disputes Appeals Expert Evidence Retrial Discretion

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Joseph Flint

Defendant/applicant

Jonathan Peter Chick

Claimant/respondent

Stephanie Jane Chick

Claimant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Second Appeal to Court of Appeal From County Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether permission should be granted for a second appeal regarding the determination of a land boundary
  2. 2 Whether there was a compelling reason or important point of principle or practice to justify a second appeal under CPR 52.13
  3. 3 Whether the lower court erred in relying on the expert report and in refusing a retrial

Ratio Decidendi

There was no important point of principle or practice, nor any compelling reason, to justify a second appeal. The applicant had the opportunity to challenge the expert evidence at trial, and any procedural disadvantages or alleged inadequacies in the expert's report were not sufficient to disturb the findings of the lower courts. The judge's exercise of discretion in refusing a retrial was reasonable and not open to challenge.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Permission to appeal refused
  • No retrial ordered