Silven Properties Ltd & Anor v Royal Bank of Scotland & Ors

The Court of Appeal considered that its judgment had resolved any doubt on the point in issue. Although the issue was important to mortgagees, mortgagors and receivers appointed under mortgages, the court considered that any further consideration should be undertaken by the House of Lords if it wished to do so. Permission for a further appeal was therefore refused. The supplied judgment does not identify the substantive issue or determine its merits.

Silven Properties Limited and Chart Enterprises Incorporated appealed to the Court of Appeal from a decision of the High Court, Chancery Division, before Mr Justice Patten. When permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal had been granted, Chadwick LJ had identified a point said to require resolution. The Court of Appeal’s judgment records its view that the point was resolved, but the supplied text does not state the point or the High Court’s decision. The issue before the court was whether permission should be granted for a further appeal to the House of Lords.

1. Permission for further appeal refused. The Court of Appeal refused permission to appeal to the House of Lords.
2. Resolution of doubt. Lord Justice Tuckey, giving the judgment of the court, stated that the judgment resolved any doubt there might have been on the point in issue.
3. Importance of the issue. The court accepted that the issue was important generally for mortgagees, mortgagors and receivers appointed under mortgages.
4. Further consideration. Despite that importance, the court considered that the House of Lords should decide whether it wished to consider the matter. The application for permission to appeal was accordingly refused.

The supplied text contains no determination of the underlying substantive issue.

1. Court of Appeal (Civil Division): The court stated that its judgment resolved any doubt on the point in issue and refused permission for a further appeal to the House of Lords. [2003] EWCA Civ 1817.
2. High Court (Chancery Division): The appeal to the Court of Appeal arose from a decision of Mr Justice Patten. The citation and substantive outcome of that decision are not stated in the judgment.