London Borough Of Southwark v Kaikai [2002] EWCA Civ 432 (19 March 2002)

London Borough Of Southwark v Kaikai [2002] EWCA Civ 432 (19 March 2002)

The application for permission to appeal does not meet the requirements of CPR 52.13 as it does not raise an important point of principle or practice nor any other compelling reason for the Court of Appeal to hear the case.

Citation
[2002] EWCA Civ 432
Parties
Claimant/respondent: The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Southwark; Defendant/applicant: Emmanuel Kaikai
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 March 2002
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal (second Appeal)
Outcome
application for permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Possession Proceedings, Rent Arrears, Stay of Execution, Appeal Procedure, Second Appeals

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 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Southwark

Claimant/respondent

Emmanuel Kaikai

Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

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

  1. 1 Whether the application for permission to appeal meets the requirements of CPR 52.13 for a second appeal
  2. 2 Whether there is an important point of principle or practice or other compelling reason for the Court of Appeal to hear the case

Ratio Decidendi

The application for permission to appeal does not meet the requirements of CPR 52.13 as it does not raise an important point of principle or practice nor any other compelling reason for the Court of Appeal to hear the case.

Court Disposition

application for permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • application refused