Smillie v Southend On Sea Borough Council

An appellate court may dismiss an application where the applicant repeatedly fails to attend despite being given a further opportunity to appear. That procedural default is especially decisive where the court has already concluded that the underlying case has no substance. Earlier reasons given on the merits may be adopted without repetition.

The claimant applied for permission to pursue judicial review, together with a stay of execution and an extension of time. The application arose from a decision of Hooper J in the Administrative Court refusing permission. The claimant had previously failed to attend when the matter was called on, and the court had given directions intended to enable her to return without hardship. She again failed to attend when the application was relisted. The central issue was whether the application should proceed in her absence.

1. The application was dismissed. The claimant had failed to appear on a number of occasions and had a history of procrastination.
2. The court had previously given judgment in her absence after she failed to attend. It had explained why, on the merits, her case had no substance. Those reasons applied equally on the relisted hearing and did not need to be repeated.
3. The claimant had been offered her fare to enable her to attend without hardship and had been given a further listing. Her continued non-attendance justified disposing of the application in her absence.

• Court of Appeal (Civil Division): The application arising from the Administrative Court’s refusal of permission was dismissed after the claimant again failed to attend.
• High Court of Justice, Queen’s Bench Division, Administrative Court (Hooper J): Permission to apply for judicial review was refused.