Webb v Chapman & Ors

The appellant did not demonstrate sufficient prospects of success on ground 5 to justify granting permission to appeal, and proceeding would impose disproportionate burdens on the parties.

Parties: Appellant: Webb; Respondent: Chapman & Ors
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 20 January 2009
Procedural Posture: Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal
Outcome: application refused
Legal Topics: Ancillary Relief, Compromise Agreements, Permission to Appeal, Proportionality

Family Law Civil Procedure Ancillary Relief Compromise Agreements Permission to Appeal Proportionality

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2

Parties

Webb

Appellant

Chapman & Ors

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

1 Whether the judge erred in law regarding grounds 1 and 5
2 Whether the compromise agreement precluded further litigation on financial matters
3 Whether permission to appeal should be granted given the prospects of success and proportionality

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant did not demonstrate sufficient prospects of success on ground 5 to justify granting permission to appeal, and proceeding would impose disproportionate burdens on the parties.

Court Disposition

application refused

Orders

Application for permission to appeal refused