Faunch v O'Donoghue & Anor

Faunch v O'Donoghue & Anor

Permission to appeal is granted because the trial judge reached a conclusion not canvassed during trial, denying parties and witnesses the opportunity to address its implications, which may have led to procedural unfairness and miscarriage of justice.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Janet Faunch; First Defendant/applicant: Mr O'Donoghue; Second Defendant/applicant: Mr Brice
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 June 2013
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal
Outcome
Permission to appeal granted
Legal Topics
Personal Injury, Road Traffic Accident, Appeal Procedure
Tort Civil Procedure Personal Injury Road Traffic Accident 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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Janet Faunch

Claimant/respondent

Mr O'Donoghue

First Defendant/applicant

Mr Brice

Second Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial process was flawed due to the judge reaching a conclusion not canvassed during trial
  2. 2 Whether the parties were denied opportunity to address the judge's hypothesis
  3. 3 Implications of findings for recovery between defendants

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to appeal is granted because the trial judge reached a conclusion not canvassed during trial, denying parties and witnesses the opportunity to address its implications, which may have led to procedural unfairness and miscarriage of justice.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal granted

Orders

  • Permission to appeal is granted
  • Full court to determine admissibility of fresh evidence