Treherne & Ors v Amateur Boxing Association Of England Ltd

On a renewed application for permission to appeal, the relevant threshold is whether the proposed appeal has a real prospect of success. A high prospect is not required. Where further analysis of contractual rules and correspondence may affect the outcome, an applicant who clears that threshold should receive permission. The court may grant permission without determining an unargued issue, such as the appropriate relief, where the factual and legal position requires further consideration.

This was a renewed application for permission to appeal from a decision of Mr Justice Garland in the Queen’s Bench Division. The underlying dispute concerned the relationship between amateur boxing bodies and the effect of the Affiliated Regional Association Rules and related correspondence.

The proposed appeal raised questions about who made the alleged offer, whether the correspondence and rule 2(206) created a contractual restriction on withdrawing consent, and whether there was consideration. The lower court had also considered an injunction, but the Court of Appeal had not heard argument on that aspect. The immediate issue was whether the applicants had no real prospect of success.

1. Permission threshold. Lord Justice Waller, speaking for both members of the court, held that the applicants had passed the applicable threshold. The court was not satisfied that the proposed appeal had no real prospect of success. The prospect of success was not regarded as high, but that was not the test.
2. Further contractual analysis. Further examination was required of section 2 of the Affiliated Regional Association Rules, identified as rules 205 and 206, together with the letters relied upon. The issues included precisely which clubs or persons were making the offer, whether the bargain could prevent the respondent from withdrawing consent arguably given under rule 2(206), what consideration existed, and how that consideration was advanced.
3. Relief. The court had not heard argument on the injunction issue and did not determine it. Any consideration of that issue would require an up-to-date assessment of the relationships between the relevant bodies and the ability of their members to participate in major competitions.
4. Disposition. The application for permission to appeal was granted. The parties were allowed further time to consider their positions, and the court noted mediation as a possible means of resolving the dispute.

• Court of Appeal (Civil Division): On a renewed application, permission to appeal was granted.
• High Court of Justice, Queen’s Bench Division: The application arose from a decision of Mr Justice Garland. The judgment records that the judge would not have granted an injunction.