Bishop v Chhokar
The application to reopen the refusal of permission to appeal was granted because the respondent admitted to lying in evidence central to the original judgment, the circumstances were exceptional, and there was no effective alternative remedy due to jurisdictional and procedural difficulties in mounting a fresh action.
- Parties
- Appellant: Robert Bishop; Respondent: Ravinder Chhokar
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 30 January 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Application to Reopen Refusal of Permission to Appeal and Grant Permission to Appeal Out of Time
- Outcome
- Application to reopen refusal of permission to appeal granted; permission to appeal out of time granted.
- Legal Topics
- Reopening Appeals, Fraud in Evidence, Jurisdiction, Credibility of Witnesses, Remedies for Judgments Obtained by Fraud
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Robert Bishop
Appellant
Ravinder Chhokar
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application to Reopen Refusal of Permission to Appeal and Grant Permission to Appeal Out of Time
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the refusal of permission to appeal should be reopened under CPR Pt 52.17 due to fraud
- 2 Whether there is an effective alternative remedy to reopening the appeal
- 3 Whether the original judgment was obtained by fraud due to false evidence
Ratio Decidendi
The application to reopen the refusal of permission to appeal was granted because the respondent admitted to lying in evidence central to the original judgment, the circumstances were exceptional, and there was no effective alternative remedy due to jurisdictional and procedural difficulties in mounting a fresh action.
Court Disposition
Application to reopen refusal of permission to appeal granted; permission to appeal out of time granted.
Orders
- Order of Jacob LJ dated 30 November 2010 set aside.
- Permission to appeal the judgment and order of HHJ Knight QC dated 20 July 2010 granted.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment