Amir Khodaparast v Peter Mark Arnstein

Amir Khodaparast v Peter Mark Arnstein

There was no arguable ground of appeal identified; the judge's findings and application of legal principles were correct and there was no procedural unfairness or error justifying permission to appeal.

Parties
Appellant/defendant: Amir Khodaparast; Respondent/claimant: Peter Mark Arnstein
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal Against Costs Order
Outcome
permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Costs Orders Against Non Parties, Permission to Appeal, Unrepresented Litigants, Abuse of Process
Civil Procedure Costs Costs Orders Against Non Parties Permission to Appeal Unrepresented Litigants Abuse of Process

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Amir Khodaparast

Appellant/defendant

Peter Mark Arnstein

Respondent/claimant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal Against Costs Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the costs order against Mr Khodaparast was wrong and should be set aside
  2. 2 Whether the hearing before the judge was unfair due to inequality of arms
  3. 3 Whether there was any arguable ground of appeal

Ratio Decidendi

There was no arguable ground of appeal identified; the judge's findings and application of legal principles were correct and there was no procedural unfairness or error justifying permission to appeal.

Court Disposition

permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • Permission to appeal against the costs order is refused.