Sharma & Ors, R (On the Application Of) v Upper Tribunal

Sharma & Ors, R (On the Application Of) v Upper Tribunal

Claims lodged after the 16-day period require an explanation for delay, but may proceed on their merits to avoid injustice due to lack of transitional provisions in the new rule.

Parties
Claimant: Sharma; Claimant: Sagar; Claimant: Arshad; Defendant: Upper Tribunal
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 November 2012
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Ruling on Procedural Application
Outcome
Applications allowed to proceed on merits despite delay
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Procedural Rules, Time Limits, Transitional Provisions
Civil Procedure Judicial Review Procedural Rules Time Limits Transitional Provisions

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sharma

Claimant

Sagar

Claimant

Arshad

Claimant

Upper Tribunal

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Ruling on Procedural Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claims lodged after the new 16-day time limit under CPR 54.7A should be allowed to proceed
  2. 2 Whether abolition of oral renewal applies to claims lodged before 1 October 2012

Ratio Decidendi

Claims lodged after the 16-day period require an explanation for delay, but may proceed on their merits to avoid injustice due to lack of transitional provisions in the new rule.

Court Disposition

Applications allowed to proceed on merits despite delay

Orders

  • Claims to be considered on their merits rather than dismissed for delay
  • A 16-day grace period applies for claims affected by the rule change