Hickling v Persons Unknown

Section 55 of the Access to Justice Act 1999 creates a stringent gateway for a second-tier appeal from a county court decision made on appeal. Permission requires either an important point of principle or practice or another compelling reason for the Court of Appeal to hear the appeal. An application that discloses neither limb does not pass that gateway. Permission may also be refused where the proposed appeal is plainly hopeless on the facts.

The applicant sought permission to appeal orders made by Liverpool County Court on 23 January 2001. The county court had dismissed his appeal from a district judge’s refusal of his application, refused his application to be joined as a party, refused permission to appeal, and restricted further applications to suspend a possession warrant. The underlying proceedings concerned enforcement of a charging order and possession of properties occupied by persons unknown. The central issue was whether the proposed second-tier appeal satisfied section 55 of the Access to Justice Act 1999.

Application refused. Lord Justice Simon Brown held that the proposed appeal was a second-tier appeal and therefore subject to the statutory gateway in section 55 of the Access to Justice Act 1999.

1. Under section 55, no appeal lies to the Court of Appeal from a county court decision made on appeal unless the Court of Appeal considers that the appeal would raise an important point of principle or practice, or that there is some other compelling reason for it to be heard.
2. The application disclosed neither requirement. Nothing in the papers, or in the applicant’s oral submissions, identified any point of principle or practice, let alone an important one. Nor was there any compelling reason, or indeed any sufficient reason, for the Court of Appeal to hear the matter.
3. The document relied upon by the applicant, a final grant of administration dated 22 March 2001, did not assist his case. The proposed appeal was also plainly hopeless on the facts.
4. The application for permission to appeal was accordingly refused.

1. Court of Appeal (Civil Division): Permission to appeal against the Liverpool County Court’s orders of 23 January 2001 was refused.
2. Liverpool County Court: His Honour Judge George dismissed the applicant’s appeal from the district judge, refused joinder, refused permission to appeal, and restricted further applications to suspend the possession warrant.
3. Liverpool County Court: District Judge Gee had dismissed the applicant’s application on 18 January 2001.