X v Y

X v Y

The applicant's interest was too remote and dependent on uncertain future events; the judge's case management decision was not perverse and all relevant factors were considered; there was no real prospect of success on appeal.

Parties
Appellant: X; Respondent: Y
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 September 2014
Procedural Posture
Application for Permission to Appeal / Oral Renewal of Application for Permission to Appeal
Outcome
application for permission to appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Intervention in Proceedings, Case Management, Resulting Trusts, Delay in Application
Family Law Trusts and Estates Intervention in Proceedings Case Management Resulting Trusts Delay in Application

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

X

Appellant

Y

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Permission to Appeal / Oral Renewal of Application for Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant should be permitted to intervene in ancillary relief proceedings
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's interest in the subject matter is sufficiently direct
  3. 3 Whether delay in applying to intervene is adequately explained

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant's interest was too remote and dependent on uncertain future events; the judge's case management decision was not perverse and all relevant factors were considered; there was no real prospect of success on appeal.

Court Disposition

application for permission to appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Transcript of judgment to be made available, sent for approval, and distributed to parties for anonymisation before public dissemination.