Ward & Anor v Ward [2001] EWCA Civ 1737 (13 November 2001)

Ward & Anor v Ward [2001] EWCA Civ 1737 (13 November 2001)

The trial judge was entitled to prefer the evidence of the solicitor over the applicant and find that the applicant signed the compromise agreement, making it binding; there is no realistic prospect of a successful appeal against that factual finding.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 1737
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Raymond Reginald Ward; Claimant/respondent: David Raymond Ward; Defendant/applicant: Anthony Ward
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 November 2001
Procedural Posture
Probate Proceedings / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal
Outcome
Application for permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Compromise of Proceedings, Authority of Solicitors, Binding Settlements, Contentious Probate, Appeals

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Raymond Reginald Ward

Claimant/respondent

David Raymond Ward

Claimant/respondent

Anthony Ward

Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Probate Proceedings / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal

  1. 1 Whether a binding compromise was reached between the parties in probate proceedings
  2. 2 Whether the applicant signed the compromise agreement
  3. 3 Whether the court should give effect to the compromise agreement under CPR 49 Practice Direction 12.2

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge was entitled to prefer the evidence of the solicitor over the applicant and find that the applicant signed the compromise agreement, making it binding; there is no realistic prospect of a successful appeal against that factual finding.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • Permission to appeal refused