31 Jan 2022
Because the applicant's delay of over three years was inexcusable (decision sent to his last known address) he was required to show a real prospect of success; he failed to demonstrate any arguable ground of error of law or procedural unfairness and therefore the extension of time was refused.
5 May 2021
The court refused the extension of time because the applicant was 24 days late, gave an unacceptable and unsupported explanation for delay, and failed to demonstrate any real prospect of success or any error of law by the judge who had given reasons for refusing leave; accordingly the summons for extension of time was dismissed.
28 Jan 2021
Applicant's delay in seeking leave to appeal was substantial and inexcusable, he failed to provide a justifiable reason or any reasonably arguable grounds for the intended judicial review and failed to comply with directions to file submissions; because an inexcusable delay requires a real prospect of success which was absent, extension of time to appeal must be refused.
3 Jun 2020
Extension of time to apply for leave to appeal was refused because the applicant's delay of over one year was inordinate and inexcusable and, irrespective of delay, the intended appeal had no realistic prospect of success since no grounds were advanced at first instance and the Judge had correctly found no arguable basis for judicial review.
2 May 1996
Application for extension of time refused because the delay was substantial and inexcusable and the intending appellant failed to demonstrate the very high prospects of success required to justify an extension; the District Court's factual finding that Mr. Liu was the employer was supported by the claimant's evidence and admissions in particulars of answer, making success on appeal improbable.