Butcher v Cornwall County Council

On a renewed application for permission to appeal, the court may grant permission on selected grounds where it is satisfied that those grounds have a real prospect of succeeding. Permission may be confined to the grounds pursued by the applicant. Grounds that are abandoned are not included in the permission order.

The claimant recovered damages in the Truro County Court after being injured when a store-cupboard door blew open and struck him. His Honour Judge Vincent found a breach of duty causing the injury and assessed the council’s responsibility at 90 per cent.

The council sought permission to appeal. A paper application was refused by Latham LJ on 25 February 2002. On renewal, the council abandoned grounds 1 to 5, concerning the position of a fire-safety trailer, and pursued grounds 6 to 12 concerning breach of duty, causation and contributory negligence.

Lord Justice Mummery gave the judgment, with Lady Justice Hale agreeing.

1. The renewed application concerned grounds 6 to 12. Counsel confirmed that grounds 1 to 5 would not be pursued. Those abandoned grounds therefore did not form part of the application renewed before the court.
2. The court was satisfied that the submissions on breach of duty, causation and contributory negligence had a real prospect of succeeding at trial and on the hearing of an appeal. Permission to appeal was accordingly granted on those grounds only.
3. The ruling determined permission and the scope of the proposed appeal. It did not determine the merits of the council’s challenges to liability, causation or contributory negligence, nor disturb the county court’s judgment at this stage.

Costs were ordered to be costs in the appeal. The time estimate was half a day.

• Court of Appeal (Civil Division): On 11 April 2002, the renewed application for permission to appeal was granted, limited to grounds 6 to 12. Costs were costs in the appeal.
• Truro County Court: On 25 January 2002, His Honour Judge Vincent gave judgment for the claimant, with damages to be assessed on the basis that the council bore 90 per cent responsibility.
• Permission stage: Latham LJ refused the council’s paper application on 25 February 2002. The application was then renewed before the Court of Appeal.