Secretary of State for Defence v Rosenfeld

Secretary of State for Defence v Rosenfeld

There were no intelligible grounds or evidence to justify the enlargement of time for appeal; the applicant delayed for more than four months before filing the notice and is not entitled to the court's discretion to proceed out of time.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: The Secretary of State for Defence; Defendant/applicant: Samuel Jay Rosenfeld
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 January 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Extension of Time and Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Appeal Procedure, Committal for Contempt, Right to Fair Hearing
Civil Procedure Extension of Time Appeal Procedure Committal for Contempt Right to Fair Hearing

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Secretary of State for Defence

Claimant/respondent

Samuel Jay Rosenfeld

Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Extension of Time and Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time to appeal against an order of committal
  2. 2 Whether the applicant was denied a fair hearing

Ratio Decidendi

There were no intelligible grounds or evidence to justify the enlargement of time for appeal; the applicant delayed for more than four months before filing the notice and is not entitled to the court's discretion to proceed out of time.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Application for extension of time refused
  • Appeal dismissed