Golding v Clarke & Clarke [2001] EWCA Civ 570 (27 March 2001)

Golding v Clarke & Clarke [2001] EWCA Civ 570 (27 March 2001)

Permission to appeal was refused because the applicant failed to show any real prospect of success on appeal, the new evidence could and should have been produced earlier, the Article 6 ECHR argument was inapplicable as the relevant acts predated the Human Rights Act 1998, and the application for adjournment was made far too late.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 570
Parties
Claimant: Michael Golding; Defendant/applicant: Mrs Clarke; Defendant: Mr Clarke
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 March 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal (second Appeal)
Outcome
application refused
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Misrepresentation, Admission of New Evidence, Human Rights Act 1998 Applicability, Article 6 ECHR, Public Funding/legal Aid, Adjournment Applications
Civil Procedure Contract Law Summary Judgment Misrepresentation Admission of New Evidence Human Rights Act 1998 Applicability Article 6 ECHR Public Funding/legal Aid +1 more

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michael Golding

Claimant

Mrs Clarke

Defendant/applicant

Mr Clarke

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal (second Appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether permission to appeal should be granted against summary judgment and striking out of counterclaim
  2. 2 Whether new evidence should be admitted on appeal
  3. 3 Whether Article 6 ECHR (right to fair trial) applies to proceedings prior to Human Rights Act 1998 commencement

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to appeal was refused because the applicant failed to show any real prospect of success on appeal, the new evidence could and should have been produced earlier, the Article 6 ECHR argument was inapplicable as the relevant acts predated the Human Rights Act 1998, and the application for adjournment was made far too late.

Court Disposition

application refused

Orders

  • Permission to appeal refused
  • Application for adjournment refused