Haas v Duquemin [2002] JRC 122 (27 June 2002)

Haas v Duquemin [2002] JRC 122 (27 June 2002)

The appellant failed to comply with the strict time limits for appealing costs decisions as set out in Rule 15/2 of the Royal Court Rules 1992, and no sufficient justification for extension of time was established. The court refused to grant an extension and awarded costs against the appellant.

Citation
[2002] JRC 122
Parties
Plaintiff: Mrs Haas; Defendant: Mr Duquemin; Defendant's Advocate: Advocate Fiott; Defendant's Advocate: Advocate Grace
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
27 June 2002
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Application for Extension of Time to Appeal Costs Orders
Outcome
application for extension of time refused
Legal Topics
Costs, Appeals, Extension of Time, Procedural Compliance

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs Haas

Plaintiff

Mr Duquemin

Defendant

Advocate Fiott

Defendant's Advocate

Advocate Grace

Defendant's Advocate

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Application for Extension of Time to Appeal Costs Orders

  1. 1 Whether the appellant should be granted an extension of time to appeal two costs decisions
  2. 2 Whether procedural time limits for appeals should be strictly enforced

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant failed to comply with the strict time limits for appealing costs decisions as set out in Rule 15/2 of the Royal Court Rules 1992, and no sufficient justification for extension of time was established. The court refused to grant an extension and awarded costs against the appellant.

Court Disposition

application for extension of time refused

Orders

  • Extension of time to appeal costs decisions refused
  • Costs on a standard basis awarded against the appellant