Hickling v Persons Unknown [2001] EWCA Civ 494 (30 March 2001)

Hickling v Persons Unknown [2001] EWCA Civ 494 (30 March 2001)

The application for permission to appeal is refused because the case does not raise any important point of principle or practice, nor is there any compelling reason for the Court of Appeal to hear it. The appeal is considered hopeless on the facts.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 494
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Neil Francis Hickling; Defendants: Persons Unknown; Applicant: Mr Arboine
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 March 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal
Outcome
application refused
Legal Topics
Charging Orders, Bankruptcy Estate, Possession Proceedings, Appeal Procedure
Civil Procedure Bankruptcy Property Law Charging Orders Bankruptcy Estate Possession Proceedings 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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Neil Francis Hickling

Claimant/respondent

Persons Unknown

Defendants

Mr Arboine

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether permission to appeal should be granted against the orders made by Judge George on 23 January 2001
  2. 2 Whether the appeal raises an important point of principle or practice or any other compelling reason under section 55 of the Access to Justice Act 1999

Ratio Decidendi

The application for permission to appeal is refused because the case does not raise any important point of principle or practice, nor is there any compelling reason for the Court of Appeal to hear it. The appeal is considered hopeless on the facts.

Court Disposition

application refused

Orders

  • Application for permission to appeal refused