Patel v Panic Link [2001] EWCA Civ 1591 (18 October 2001)

The applicant's delay in seeking an extension of time is fatal, and there is no good reason to grant the extension, especially as the legal issue will be addressed in other pending appeals.

Citation: [2001] EWCA Civ 1591
Parties: Claimant/applicant: Paresh Patel; Defendant/respondent: Panic Link
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 18 October 2001
Procedural Posture: Civil Appeal / Application for Extension of Time to Appeal
Outcome: Application for extension of time refused
Legal Topics: Extension of Time for Appeal, Damages for Vehicle Repairs, Credit Repair Agreements, Second Appeals Under Access to Justice Act 1999

Civil Procedure Tort Law Extension of Time for Appeal Damages for Vehicle Repairs Credit Repair Agreements Second Appeals Under Access to Justice Act 1999

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 1

Parties

Paresh Patel

Claimant/applicant

Panic Link

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Extension of Time to Appeal

Legal Issues

1 Whether an extension of time for appeal should be granted after significant delay
2 Whether the reasoning in Dimond v Lovell precludes a claim for damages for diminution in value of a vehicle when repairs are paid by a third party under an unenforceable agreement

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant's delay in seeking an extension of time is fatal, and there is no good reason to grant the extension, especially as the legal issue will be addressed in other pending appeals.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time refused

Orders

Application for extension of time refused with costs
Costs assessed in the sum of £963.79