Harper & Anor v Hopkins

The applicants' failure to file the Notice of Appeal within the prescribed time was due to ignorance or carelessness regarding the time limit, not to any supervening illness. Ignorance of the time limit is not a sufficient excuse, and the discretionary extension was properly refused by Judge McMullen.

Parties: Appellant: John Harper; Appellant: Julie Watson; Respondent: George Edward Hopkins
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 27 May 2010
Procedural Posture: Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal
Outcome: application adjourned
Legal Topics: Extension of Time, Default Judgment, Unfair Dismissal, Right to Fair Trial

Employment Law Civil Procedure Extension of Time Default Judgment Unfair Dismissal Right to Fair Trial

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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

John Harper

Appellant

Julie Watson

Appellant

George Edward Hopkins

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

1 Whether the applicants should be granted an extension of time to appeal against the refusal of a review application
2 Whether ignorance of the appeal time limit constitutes a sufficient excuse for delay
3 Whether illness or other circumstances justified the late filing of the Notice of Appeal

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

application adjourned

Orders

Application for permission to appeal adjourned to the full court on notice to the respondent.
If permission to appeal is granted, the appeal will follow immediately.