Faryab v Philip Ross & Co (A Firm) [2002] EWCA Civ 1123 (22 July 2002)

Faryab v Philip Ross & Co (A Firm) [2002] EWCA Civ 1123 (22 July 2002)

The application for permission to appeal is wholly misconceived and unsustainable, especially as the substantive trial has since concluded and the applicant was comprehensively defeated; there is no arguable error in the interlocutory order or costs award.

Citation
[2002] EWCA Civ 1123
Parties
Claimant/applicant: Farhad Faryab; Defendant/respondent: Philip Ross & Co (A Firm)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 July 2002
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal Interlocutory Order
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
Disclosure, Costs, Appeals, Interlocutory Orders
Civil Procedure Disclosure Costs Appeals Interlocutory Orders

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Farhad Faryab

Claimant/applicant

Philip Ross & Co (A Firm)

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal Interlocutory Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court erred in refusing further specific disclosure
  2. 2 Whether the costs order against the claimant was irrational or inconsistent with the judge's reasoning
  3. 3 Whether permission to appeal should be granted after the substantive trial has concluded

Ratio Decidendi

The application for permission to appeal is wholly misconceived and unsustainable, especially as the substantive trial has since concluded and the applicant was comprehensively defeated; there is no arguable error in the interlocutory order or costs award.

Court Disposition

Application refused

Orders

  • Permission to appeal refused
  • Application dismissed