Home Farm Dev Ltd -v- HJL Holdings and Lingard [2014] JRC 209 (29 October 2014)

Home Farm Dev Ltd -v- HJL Holdings and Lingard [2014] JRC 209 (29 October 2014)

The applications for leave to appeal were dismissed because the representors failed to appear after two prior adjournments, and the medical evidence provided was inadequate to justify a further adjournment. The conduct was unreasonable and warranted indemnity costs.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2014] JRC 209
Parties
Representor: Home Farm Developments Limited; Representor: Mr Shane Holmes; Respondent: Respondents to Representation 2013/341
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
29 October 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Representation (costs Appeal) / Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time, Dismissed for Non Appearance
Outcome
applications dismissed for non-appearance
Legal Topics
Adjournment, Leave to Appeal, Taxation of Costs, Indemnity Costs, Litigant in Person
Civil Procedure Costs Adjournment Leave to Appeal Taxation of Costs Indemnity Costs Litigant in Person

Source-derived case record

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Home Farm Developments Limited

Representor

Mr Shane Holmes

Representor

Respondents to Representation 2013/341

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Representation (costs Appeal) / Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time, Dismissed for Non Appearance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether further adjournment should be granted on medical grounds
  2. 2 Whether applications for leave to appeal costs orders should be dismissed for non-appearance

Ratio Decidendi

The applications for leave to appeal were dismissed because the representors failed to appear after two prior adjournments, and the medical evidence provided was inadequate to justify a further adjournment. The conduct was unreasonable and warranted indemnity costs.

Court Disposition

applications dismissed for non-appearance

Orders

  • Applications for leave to appeal dismissed with indemnity costs to respondents