Key Facts
- •Defendants (Crescent) applied for an order requiring Claimant (NIOC) to pay part of the judgment debt into court as a condition for appealing the summary dismissal of its section 67 challenge.
- •The court initially dismissed NIOC's section 67 application and adjourned consequential matters, including permission to appeal.
- •NIOC was granted permission to appeal on Grounds 2-5, but not Ground 1.
- •Crescent subsequently applied for the permission to appeal to be conditional upon NIOC paying a sum into court.
- •This application was made after the court's initial ruling granting unconditional permission to appeal.
Legal Principles
The court may make an order subject to conditions, including payment into court.
CPR 3.1(3)
An order granting permission to appeal may be made subject to conditions.
CPR 52.6(2)
The appeal court may impose or vary conditions on an appeal; this will only be done where there is a compelling reason.
CPR 52.18
Once unconditional permission to appeal is granted, it is too late to make it conditional; the appeal court handles such conditions.
Goldtrail Travel Limited v Onur Air Tasimacilik [2017] UKSC 57
A judge may change an order before it's sealed, but the principle of finality is important; reconsideration requires weighty factors outweighing the finality principle.
AIC Limited v Federal Airports Authority of Nigeria [2022] 1 WLR 3223
Consequential issues should be dealt with promptly to avoid unnecessary delays and costs.
Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance Limited v Tughans [2022] EWHC 2825 (Comm)
A party present at the permission hearing cannot later apply for the permission to be set aside or made conditional.
CPR 52.18(3)
Applications to impose conditions should be made at the time permission to appeal is granted to avoid additional costs and delays.
Spar Shipping v Grand China Logistics Holdings (Group) Co. Limited [2016] EWCA Civ 520
Outcomes
Crescent's application to make the permission to appeal conditional was refused.
The application was deemed too late; Crescent had ample opportunity to raise the issue of conditions earlier. The new circumstances presented did not justify re-opening the decision, and the principle of finality was given significant weight.