Hafizur Rahman v Mohammed Abdul Munim & Anor
[2024] EWCA Civ 123
Amelia Miggiano v Islwyn Evans
2 May 2024
[2024] EWHC 1335 (KB)
High Court
A woman claimed her signature on a house transfer was forged. The judge believed her signature was real, based on evidence including expert opinion. The appeal court agreed with the judge, saying there wasn't enough reason to change the decision. The appeal was denied.
Key Facts
- •Amelia Miggiano applied for permission to appeal the dismissal of her claim that a property transfer signature was forged.
- •The transfer of property 'Bella Vista' from Mrs. Miggiano to her son Andrew was disputed.
- •The trial judge, His Honour Judge Jarman KC, found the signature genuine.
- •The expert witness, Paul Craddock, concluded the signature was likely genuine, though with moderate evidence.
- •Mrs. Miggiano appeared in person with family assistance.
- •The defendant, Islwyn Evans, was the executor of Andrew Miggiano's estate.
Legal Principles
An appeal court should not interfere with a trial judge's conclusions on primary facts unless the judge was plainly wrong. A decision is only overturned if no reasonable judge could have reached it.
Volpi v Volpi [2022] EWCA Civ 464, paragraph 2
In the absence of identifiable errors (e.g., material error of law, critical finding with no basis in evidence, misunderstanding/failure to consider relevant evidence), an appellate court will only interfere if the trial judge's decision is unjustifiable.
Henderson v Foxworth Investments Limited [2014] UKSC 41, paragraph 67
Appellate courts should not interfere with trial judge findings of fact unless compelled to do so. This includes findings of primary fact, evaluation of facts, and inferences drawn from them.
Fage UK Limited v Chobani Limited [2014] EWCA Civ 5, paragraph 114
Permission to appeal can only be given if there's a real prospect of success or another compelling reason.
Civil Procedure Rule 52.7
Outcomes
Permission to appeal denied.
The appeal lacked a real prospect of success. The trial judge's decision was supported by evidence, including expert testimony, contemporaneous documentation, and witness accounts. The appellant failed to demonstrate any error of law or reasoning by the trial judge.
Similar Cases
Julie Amanda Mate v Shirley Clare Mate & Ors
[2023] EWHC 675 (Ch)
Safina Bi Azam v Mohammed Molazam
[2023] EWHC 2202 (Ch)
Close Brothers Limited v Rooster Trucking Company Limited & Ors.
[2023] EWCA Civ 533
Arvindar Singh (as trustee in bankruptcy of Mrs Angela Garcha) v Angela Garcha & Ors
[2024] EWHC 1844 (Ch)