Foster v Foster [2002] EWCA Civ 461 (8 March 2002)

Foster v Foster [2002] EWCA Civ 461 (8 March 2002)

The application for permission to appeal out of time is refused because the grounds do not satisfy the high threshold of CPR 52.13; the appeal does not raise an important point of principle or practice nor any other compelling reason. The lower courts were entitled to reach their findings on the evidence, and the refusal to admit new evidence was a proper exercise of discretion.

Citation
[2002] EWCA Civ 461
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Robert David Edward Foster; Defendant/appellant: Cindy Louise Foster
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 March 2002
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal Out of Time to the Court of Appeal
Outcome
Application for permission to appeal out of time dismissed
Legal Topics
Financial Provision on Divorce, Appeals Procedure, Extension of Time, Clean Break Orders
Family Law Civil Procedure Financial Provision on Divorce Appeals Procedure Extension of Time Clean Break 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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert David Edward Foster

Claimant/respondent

Cindy Louise Foster

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal Out of Time to the Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether permission to appeal out of time should be granted
  2. 2 Whether the appeal raises an important point of principle or practice or some other compelling reason under CPR 52.13
  3. 3 Whether the lower courts erred in assessing the applicant's income and capital for the lump sum order

Ratio Decidendi

The application for permission to appeal out of time is refused because the grounds do not satisfy the high threshold of CPR 52.13; the appeal does not raise an important point of principle or practice nor any other compelling reason. The lower courts were entitled to reach their findings on the evidence, and the refusal to admit new evidence was a proper exercise of discretion.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to appeal out of time dismissed

Orders

  • No order for costs