In the matter of L (Matrimonial) [2014] JCA 192 (08 October 2014)

In the matter of L (Matrimonial) [2014] JCA 192 (08 October 2014)

The Commissioner applied the correct legal principles in refusing the adjournment, properly balanced the risk of prejudice against delay and court resources, and exercised his discretion appropriately. No misdirection or error justifying leave to appeal was demonstrated.

Citation
[2014] JCA 192
Parties
Husband: A; Wife: B
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
08 October 2014
Procedural Posture
Matrimonial/ancillary Relief / Application for Leave to Appeal (single Judge)
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Adjournment, Case Management Discretion, Ancillary Relief, Expert Evidence
Family Law Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Adjournment Case Management Discretion Ancillary Relief Expert Evidence

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A

Husband

B

Wife

Procedural Posture

Matrimonial/ancillary Relief / Application for Leave to Appeal (single Judge)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted against refusal of adjournment in ancillary relief proceedings
  2. 2 Whether the lower court applied the correct legal test for adjournment and leave to appeal

Ratio Decidendi

The Commissioner applied the correct legal principles in refusing the adjournment, properly balanced the risk of prejudice against delay and court resources, and exercised his discretion appropriately. No misdirection or error justifying leave to appeal was demonstrated.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused

Orders

  • Application for leave to appeal refused
  • Order for wife's costs, taxed if not agreed