Banks & Anor v Cox & Anor [2001] EWCA Civ 821 (17 May 2001)

Banks & Anor v Cox & Anor [2001] EWCA Civ 821 (17 May 2001)

The application for permission to appeal was dismissed because the grounds advanced by Mr and Mrs Cox either raised issues already fully considered at trial and retrial, or sought to introduce evidence that could and should have been adduced earlier. The trial judge's findings on misrepresentation and credibility were not susceptible to challenge, and no proper basis for appeal was shown.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 821
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Grant Russell Banks; Claimant/respondent: Janine Elaine Banks; Defendant/applicant: John Cox; Defendant/applicant: Sonia Shane Cox
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 May 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal to the Court of Appeal From the Chancery Division
Outcome
Application for permission to appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Damages, Freezing Order, Admissibility of Evidence, Appeal Procedure
Contract Law Tort Law Fraudulent Misrepresentation Damages Freezing Order Admissibility of Evidence Appeal Procedure

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Grant Russell Banks

Claimant/respondent

Janine Elaine Banks

Claimant/respondent

John Cox

Defendant/applicant

Sonia Shane Cox

Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal to the Court of Appeal From the Chancery Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants made a fraudulent misrepresentation in answering 'No' to preliminary enquiry No 20 regarding material change in the business
  2. 2 Whether new evidence should be admitted on appeal
  3. 3 Whether the freezing order should be varied

Ratio Decidendi

The application for permission to appeal was dismissed because the grounds advanced by Mr and Mrs Cox either raised issues already fully considered at trial and retrial, or sought to introduce evidence that could and should have been adduced earlier. The trial judge's findings on misrepresentation and credibility were not susceptible to challenge, and no proper basis for appeal was shown.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No order for costs
  • Legal aid assessment of the respondent's costs