Ewing v Times Newspapers Ltd [2010] NIQB 65 (27 May 2010)

Ewing v Times Newspapers Ltd [2010] NIQB 65 (27 May 2010)

The purported cancellation of the writ by a court officer was without legal authority and thus a nullity; the writ was prima facie valid and subsisting at the relevant time. The application to restore the writ was misconceived, as was the subsequent application to set aside the refusal order. The court cannot finally determine the writ's validity on the present appeal due to incomplete evidence and procedural posture. The matter should be remitted to the Master to consider the validity of the writ as a fresh application.

Citation
[2010] NIQB 65
Parties
Putative Plaintiff/appellant: Terence Patrick Ewing; Putative Defendant/respondent: Times Newspapers Limited
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
27 May 2010
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Interlocutory Appeal From Master's Order
Outcome
Appeal neither allowed nor dismissed; matter remitted to Master for determination of writ validity as a fresh application; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
Ex Parte Applications, Setting Aside Orders, Inherent Jurisdiction, Irregularity in Writs, Court Officer Authority
Civil Procedure Ex Parte Applications Setting Aside Orders Inherent Jurisdiction Irregularity in Writs Court Officer Authority

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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Terence Patrick Ewing

Putative Plaintiff/appellant

Times Newspapers Limited

Putative Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Interlocutory Appeal From Master's Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a party whose ex parte application to restore a writ was refused can apply to set aside that refusal order
  2. 2 Whether the writ was valid and subsisting after purported cancellation by a court officer
  3. 3 Whether the absence of an address for service renders a writ a nullity or an irregularity

Ratio Decidendi

The purported cancellation of the writ by a court officer was without legal authority and thus a nullity; the writ was prima facie valid and subsisting at the relevant time. The application to restore the writ was misconceived, as was the subsequent application to set aside the refusal order. The court cannot finally determine the writ's validity on the present appeal due to incomplete evidence and procedural posture. The matter should be remitted to the Master to consider the validity of the writ as a fresh application.

Court Disposition

Appeal neither allowed nor dismissed; matter remitted to Master for determination of writ validity as a fresh application; costs reserved.

Orders

  • Matter remitted to the Master to consider paragraph 4 of Mr. Ewing's Notice of Appeal as a fresh, freestanding application issued on 23 March 2010.
  • Appeal adjourned.