Zappia Middle East Construction Co Ltd & Anor v Clifford Chance (A Firm) [2001] EWCA Civ 1383 (30 August 2001)

Zappia Middle East Construction Co Ltd & Anor v Clifford Chance (A Firm) [2001] EWCA Civ 1383 (30 August 2001)

No good reason was provided to depart from the normal practice that only those with rights of audience may appear as advocate for a company; the absence of such representation was the result of the applicant's own choices and did not amount to injustice or hardship.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 1383
Parties
Applicant/claimant: Zappia Middle East Construction Co Ltd; Applicant/claimant: Joseph Jeannot Zappia; Respondent/defendant: Clifford Chance (A Firm)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 August 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Solicitor's Right of Audience on Appeal; Extension of Time for Security for Costs
Outcome
application refused
Legal Topics
Right of Audience, Representation by Solicitor, Security for Costs, Extension of Time
Civil Procedure Right of Audience Representation by Solicitor Security for Costs Extension of Time

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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Zappia Middle East Construction Co Ltd

Applicant/claimant

Joseph Jeannot Zappia

Applicant/claimant

Clifford Chance (A Firm)

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Solicitor's Right of Audience on Appeal; Extension of Time for Security for Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a solicitor without higher rights of audience may be granted permission to appear as advocate for a company in the Court of Appeal
  2. 2 Whether the absence of preferred counsel justifies an exception to the normal rule on rights of audience

Ratio Decidendi

No good reason was provided to depart from the normal practice that only those with rights of audience may appear as advocate for a company; the absence of such representation was the result of the applicant's own choices and did not amount to injustice or hardship.

Court Disposition

application refused

Orders

  • Application for solicitor's right of audience refused; Mr Zappia to conduct advocacy for himself and the company if he wishes.