Hurst v Leeming [2002] EWCA Civ 1173 (23 July 2002)

Hurst v Leeming [2002] EWCA Civ 1173 (23 July 2002)

There was no arguable basis for judicial bias as prior professional contact and club support did not create a real possibility of bias; the refusal to mediate was justified given the hopelessness of the claim and the applicant's conduct; the consent order could not be set aside absent fraud, mistake, or misrepresentation.

Citation
[2002] EWCA Civ 1173
Parties
Claimant/applicant: Robert Alfred Hurst; Defendant/respondent: Ian Leeming QC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 July 2002
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal
Outcome
Application for permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Costs, Judicial Bias, Alternative Dispute Resolution, Consent 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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert Alfred Hurst

Claimant/applicant

Ian Leeming QC

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the judge should have recused himself for alleged bias
  2. 2 Whether the refusal to mediate should affect the costs order
  3. 3 Whether the consent order could be set aside

Ratio Decidendi

There was no arguable basis for judicial bias as prior professional contact and club support did not create a real possibility of bias; the refusal to mediate was justified given the hopelessness of the claim and the applicant's conduct; the consent order could not be set aside absent fraud, mistake, or misrepresentation.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • Permission to appeal refused