John Kenneth Greenwood & Anor v Ronald Patrick Pringle
[2024] EWHC 84 (Ch)
Tameside Caravans and Storage Limited v Viavecto Limited
23 January 2024
[2024] EWHC 95 (KB)
High Court
A company missed the deadline to appeal a court decision that made them lose their land. They said they were too busy and thought their old lawyers were to blame, so they didn't get a new lawyer right away. The judge said that wasn't a good enough excuse, and refused to let them appeal.
Key Facts
- •Tameside Caravan and Storage Limited (TCSL) applied for a retrospective extension of time to file an Appellant's Notice, approximately three months late.
- •The appeal was against an order granting possession of land to Viavecto Limited.
- •The trial judge ruled that TCSL could not raise a particular argument about the form of a statutory declaration without amending its defence, and refused a late amendment application.
- •TCSL argued the trial judge's decision was a serious irregularity.
- •TCSL's initial appeal notice was on the wrong form and lacked valid grounds of appeal.
- •TCSL's subsequent solicitor argued the complexity of rules and TCSL's unrepresented status should excuse the delay.
- •TCSL's director believed its previous solicitors were at fault for the loss at trial and assumed a conflict of interest prevented them from filing a timely appeal.
Legal Principles
Relief from sanctions principles from *Mitchell*, *Denton*, and *Hysaj* apply. The court considers the seriousness of the breach, the reason for the breach, and all circumstances.
R (Hysaj) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWCA Civ 133; Mitchell v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 1537; Denton v T.H. White Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 906
Being a litigant in person is not, in itself, a good reason for non-compliance with rules. Any leniency is at the margins.
R (Hysaj) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] 1 WLR 2472; Tinkler v Elliott [2012] EWCA Civ 1289; Nata Lee Ltd v Abid [2014] EWCA Civ 1652; Barton v Wright Hassall LLP [2016] EWCA Civ 177
The court considers the merits of the appeal only when they are clearly very strong or very weak.
Hysaj
A defendant must plead facts, not just law, and provide reasons for denying allegations.
CPR 16.5(2)
Outcomes
The application for retrospective extension of time was refused.
The delay was serious and substantial, without good reason. The merits of the appeal were very weak. TCSL's director made a conscious decision not to seek legal representation within the time limit, based on flawed assumptions.