Litigation lawyers have offered qualified support to new proposals to reduce delays in Court of Appeal hearings.
The Civil Procedure Rule Committee (CPRC) reviewed the oral and written process for applications to the Court to see where it could be streamlined, after judges sitting alone came under pressure due to an increased workload. Its proposals include raising the threshold for permission to appeal from a “real prospect” to “a substantial prospect of success”, and removing the automatic right to an oral hearing when applying for permission to appeal.
Ed Crosse, president of the London Solicitors Litigation Association (LSLA) (pictured), says: “The LSLA appreciates that significant Appeal Court time could be saved by removing the automatic right to an oral permission hearing but there will need to be appropriate safeguards to limit the risk of injustice, particularly as it is proposed that there will be no right of appeal if a permission application is dismissed on paper.
“Alternatively, the rules could be amended to increase the scope for a single judge to refuse an oral hearing because the case has ‘no realistic prospect of success’ rather than the current ‘totally without merit’ test. Judges could also limit the issues addressed by applicants in oral hearings and deliver their decisions concisely, there and then, with no right of appeal against the decision.
“We would also propose discouraging tactical or unmeritorious permission applications by imposing adverse costs orders in favour of respondents who have been forced to incur costs by having had to respond.”
Crosse said appeals are often listed for longer than necessary and the Court could free up time by taking a “tougher approach”.
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=3d1684d4_1)
