Milne v Kennedy & Ors [1999] EWCA Civ 668 (28 January 1999)

Milne v Kennedy & Ors [1999] EWCA Civ 668 (28 January 1999)

The judge failed to identify or apply the requirement for exceptional circumstances when granting rights of audience to a lay person under section 27(2)(c) of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990; therefore, the discretion was exercised on the wrong principles and the order must be set aside.

Citation
[1999] EWCA Civ 668
Parties
Appellant/plaintiff: Andrew Jonathan Milne; Respondent/defendant: Shirley Kennedy; Respondent/defendant: David Jones; Respondent/defendant: Richard Cazenove; Respondent/defendant: Judith Bollinger; Respondent/defendant: Denise Lamont Gordon; Respondent/defendant: Jennifer Gillibrand; Respondent/defendant: Michael Gillibrand
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 January 1999
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Central London County Court Judgment on Rights of Audience
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Rights of Audience, Discretion of Court, Representation by Lay Persons, Courts and Legal Services Act 1990
Civil Procedure Rights of Audience Discretion of Court Representation by Lay Persons Courts and Legal Services Act 1990

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 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Andrew Jonathan Milne

Appellant/plaintiff

Shirley Kennedy

Respondent/defendant

David Jones

Respondent/defendant

Richard Cazenove

Respondent/defendant

Judith Bollinger

Respondent/defendant

Denise Lamont Gordon

Respondent/defendant

Jennifer Gillibrand

Respondent/defendant

Michael Gillibrand

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Central London County Court Judgment on Rights of Audience

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge erred in granting a lay person (Mrs Mainwaring) rights of audience to represent defendants in county court proceedings under section 27(2)(c) of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990.

Ratio Decidendi

The judge failed to identify or apply the requirement for exceptional circumstances when granting rights of audience to a lay person under section 27(2)(c) of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990; therefore, the discretion was exercised on the wrong principles and the order must be set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order granting Mrs Mainwaring rights of audience set aside
  • No order as to costs