Jamous v Mercouris [2020] EWHC 2814 (QB) (23 October 2020)

Jamous v Mercouris [2020] EWHC 2814 (QB) (23 October 2020)

The delay in filing the appellant's notice was serious and significant, and no good reason was provided for the default. The applicant and his mother repeatedly failed to comply with court orders, and the court had already made multiple allowances. The interests of justice and the need to enforce compliance with rules and orders required refusal of the extension of time. Accordingly, the application for extension of time to appeal and permission to appeal was refused.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 2814 (QB)
Parties
Claimant/applicant: Tarik Jamous; Defendant/respondent: Alexander Mercouris
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 October 2020
Procedural Posture
Appeal (application for Extension of Time and Permission to Appeal) / Judgment on Application for Extension of Time to Appeal and Permission to Appeal
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
Extension of Time to Appeal, Relief From Sanctions, Capacity to Litigate, Striking Out of Claim, Litigant in Person Conduct
Civil Procedure Personal Injury Mental Capacity Extension of Time to Appeal Relief From Sanctions Capacity to Litigate Striking Out of Claim Litigant in Person Conduct

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tarik Jamous

Claimant/applicant

Alexander Mercouris

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (application for Extension of Time and Permission to Appeal) / Judgment on Application for Extension of Time to Appeal and Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time to file an appellant's notice
  2. 2 Whether permission to appeal should be granted against the order striking out the claim for failure to file a certificate of capacity

Ratio Decidendi

The delay in filing the appellant's notice was serious and significant, and no good reason was provided for the default. The applicant and his mother repeatedly failed to comply with court orders, and the court had already made multiple allowances. The interests of justice and the need to enforce compliance with rules and orders required refusal of the extension of time. Accordingly, the application for extension of time to appeal and permission to appeal was refused.

Court Disposition

Application refused

Orders

  • Refusal of application for extension of time to file appellant's notice
  • Refusal of permission to appeal