Uruakpa & Anor v British Council

In a renewed application for permission to seek judicial review, a current and convincing medical certificate may justify taking the hearing out of the list and making it available for relisting. The court may assess later medical evidence separately from an earlier certificate that did not justify an adjournment. The order determines only the immediate case-management issue and does not decide permission or the merits.

Dr Uruakpa and another renewed their application for permission to seek judicial review and for an extension of time. Permission had previously been refused on paper and, after an oral hearing, by Mr Justice Lightman on 19 March 2002. The applicants sought an adjournment of the Court of Appeal hearing because Dr Uruakpa was medically unable to travel. A previous adjournment request had been refused by Master Venne, but a further medical certificate was placed before the court on 16 July 2002. The central issue was whether that certificate justified removing the renewed application from the day’s list.

Disposition

The renewed application was not heard on its merits. It was taken out of the day’s list and treated as available for relisting from the following Monday.

1. Lord Justice Kennedy considered an earlier medical certificate unconvincing on its face. It did not justify an adjournment of the hearing.
2. A further certificate, in the form of a letter from the applicant’s general practitioner dated 16 July 2002, stated that the applicant had symptoms of nerve root entrapment in his leg and was unable to make the journey to London that day.
3. The further certificate was more convincing. Although it did not indicate when the applicant would be fit to travel, it justified taking the matter out of the list and making it available for relisting.
4. The court made no determination on the underlying application for permission to seek judicial review, the proposed extension of time, or the merits of the claim.

• Court of Appeal (Civil Division): The renewed application was not determined on 16 July 2002 and was taken out of the list, being available for relisting from the following Monday: [2002] EWCA Civ 1379.
• High Court: Mr Justice Lightman refused permission after an oral hearing on 19 March 2002. Permission had previously been refused on paper.