Key Facts
- •Mr and Mrs Greenwood (Appellants) sold their pub business to Mr Pringle (Respondent).
- •Appellants claimed unpaid purchase money and other losses, including redundancy pay from the Employment Tribunal.
- •Appellants served defective statutory demands on Respondent, which were set aside.
- •Respondent obtained a charging order against Appellants' property for costs.
- •Appellants attempted to appeal the decision setting aside the statutory demand, but missed the deadline and used incorrect procedures.
- •Appellants failed to provide a UK address for service or a transcript of the lower court's decision.
Legal Principles
Test for successful appeal: Decision of lower court was wrong or unjust due to serious procedural irregularity.
CPR rule 52.21
Permission to appeal requires a real prospect of success or other compelling reason.
CPR rule 52.6
Appellant must file notice within 21 days of the lower court's decision, unless otherwise directed.
CPR rule 52.12
Application for extension of time follows the Denton test (seriousness of breach, reason for default, all circumstances).
R (Hysaj) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] EWCA Civ 1633; Denton v TH White [2014] 1 WLR 795
Lack of legal representation is not a good reason for non-compliance with rules.
Lakatamia Shipping Co Ltd v Su [2019] EWCA Civ 1626; Barton v Wright Hassall [2018] 1 WLR 1119
A statutory demand is not appropriate for a debt disputed on substantial grounds.
Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016, rule 10.5(5)
CPR rule 6.23 requires a UK address for service.
CPR rule 6.23; Axnoller Events Ltd v Brake [2022] EWHC 1162 (Ch)
Outcomes
Appellants' applications for an extension of time and permission to appeal were adjourned pending compliance with court orders.
Appellants failed to meet the time limit for filing the appeal and failed to comply with court orders to provide a UK address for service and a transcript. The court applied the Denton test and found no good reason for the delays.