Chambers v Rooney & Anor [2017] EWHC 285 (QB) (28 January 2017)

Chambers v Rooney & Anor [2017] EWHC 285 (QB) (28 January 2017)

There was no arguable basis for the proposed appeal against the order striking out claims and dismissing applications. The claims struck out were either legally unsustainable, time-barred, or factually baseless. The applicant failed to act promptly or provide sufficient grounds for extension of time. No procedural unfairness or bias was established. Accordingly, the application for extension of time to appeal was refused.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 285
Parties
Claimant (appellant): Mrs Beverley Chambers; First Defendant (respondent): Mr Crispin Mark Rooney; Second Defendant (respondent): Ms Marianne Wiles
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 January 2017
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time to Appeal (civil) / Renewed Application for Extension of Time to Appeal, Post Judgment, Pre Trial
Outcome
Application for extension of time to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
Extension of Time to Appeal, Striking Out of Claims, Summary Judgment, Limitation of Actions (defamation), Costs, Litigants in Person, Conflict of Interest (solicitors)
Civil Procedure Probate and Estates Defamation Extension of Time to Appeal Striking Out of Claims Summary Judgment Limitation of Actions (defamation) Costs +2 more

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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs Beverley Chambers

Claimant (appellant)

Mr Crispin Mark Rooney

First Defendant (respondent)

Ms Marianne Wiles

Second Defendant (respondent)

Procedural Posture

Application for Extension of Time to Appeal (civil) / Renewed Application for Extension of Time to Appeal, Post Judgment, Pre Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time to appeal parts of an order striking out claims and dismissing applications in probate litigation
  2. 2 Whether the judge below erred in striking out certain heads of claim, including defamation, punitive damages, and accounting claims
  3. 3 Whether the limitation period for defamation claims could be extended under section 32A of the Limitation Act 1980

Ratio Decidendi

There was no arguable basis for the proposed appeal against the order striking out claims and dismissing applications. The claims struck out were either legally unsustainable, time-barred, or factually baseless. The applicant failed to act promptly or provide sufficient grounds for extension of time. No procedural unfairness or bias was established. Accordingly, the application for extension of time to appeal was refused.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time to appeal refused.

Orders

  • Refusal of extension of time to appeal.
  • No transfer to Chancery Division due to imminent trial.