20 Apr 2023
Venning J correctly found the appellant acted unreasonably in declining the respondent's reasonable proposal to adjourn the District Court discovery fixture; the Court of Appeal admitted the additional correspondence but concluded it did not alter that finding, dismissed the appeal and affirmed the costs award, awarding further uplifted costs for the meritless, prolix appeal.
9 Apr 2018
A halt order under s 42(2) of the Insolvency Act 2006 was appropriate and was granted pending the hearing and determination of Mr Prescott's appeal and judicial review set down for 14 August 2018 because the appeal was bona fide and not plainly hopeless, the prejudice to the creditor did not outweigh granting a halt, and the public/administrative considerations supported pausing adjudication; the halt was conditional on compliance with the appeal timetable and reserved leave to the creditor to apply to lift the halt if the debtor defaulted.
24 Jun 2015
The transfer application was properly dismissed as filed materially late given statutory and rule time limits and the proceedings had been pending for over four years with a hearing imminent; refusal to adjourn or stay was justified because there was no proper basis for delay, the respondent was entitled to timely adjudication, and the appellant's failure to attend and prosecute his case meant relief would not have been granted even if he had been given further opportunity; procedural infirmities did not warrant interference because the substantive outcome was inevitable.
29 Nov 2013
The proposed grounds did not arise from the High Court's determination as points of law capable of bona fide and serious argument; most questions were factual or irrelevant to the High Court decision and therefore did not meet the statutory threshold under s254, so leave to appeal was refused.
30 Aug 2011
The Court refused to order a stay, dismissed the application for a judicial settlement conference, set a fixed timetable and detailed interlocutory directions for amendment of pleadings, discovery (including contested privilege issues), filing deadlines, transmission of the Tribunal record and an issues conference to ready the judicial review for an eight‑day hearing beginning 27 February 2012; applications for non‑party discovery and costs applications were to be filed to specified deadlines and costs were reserved.
17 Feb 2011
s84N confines a Judge's review to specified Registrar powers and omits s84D; therefore the District Court Judge lacked authority to rescind the adjournment or to make a s84M variation himself, and remitting the matter to the Registrar to add the agreed interest was correct; appeal dismissed.