Abernethy, R (on the application of) v Local Government Ombudsman

[2002] EWCA Civ 1469

Summary

The supplied text contains the appellant’s oral submissions and records that judgment followed, but it does not include the Court of Appeal’s reasons or disposition. No ratio decidendi can therefore be extracted from the supplied material.

Factual background

The claimant appealed from proceedings in the High Court Administrative Court before Richards J. The issues raised included the lawfulness of the Local Government Ombudsman’s report and the propriety of costs orders made in related judicial-review proceedings. The supplied text ends immediately before the Court of Appeal’s judgment and does not state the result.

Held

Not stated in the supplied judgment text. The material provided contains submissions by the claimant, followed by the words “Judgment followed”, but does not contain the court’s reasoning, findings or operative order.

The court’s approach to earlier authorities

Available to signed-in members.

Appellate history

  • High Court, Administrative Court: Proceedings before Richards J are described, including decisions concerning the Ombudsman’s report and costs. The citation of the judgment appealed is not stated.
  • Court of Appeal (Civil Division): Appeal heard on 7 October 2002. The supplied text does not state the disposition.

Appeal route

  1. Appealed fromNot stated in the judgmentThis appealnot stated in the judgment.
  2. This judgment [2002] EWCA Civ 1469 Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

Key cases cited

Available to signed-in members.

Cases citing this case

Available to signed-in members.