header-logo header-logo

14 October 2016 / Richard Langley
Issue: 7718 / Categories: Opinion
printer mail-detail

Swift justice?

nlj_7718_langley

Abolishing renewal hearings may tackle the appeals backlog, but at what price? Richard Langley reports

It is a truth, not universally acknowledged by the senior judiciary, that each wave of judge-led procedural reforms has involved the creation of new procedure that only serves to add to the legal costs being incurred. Costs budgeting is the most obvious recent example.

It is only fair to acknowledge therefore that we now have a reform in relation to appeals to the Court of Appeal which will remove a significant part of the appeal process and all the costs that go with it.

With effect from 3 October 2016, when an application for permission to appeal is made to the Court of Appeal, the application will be determined on paper without an oral hearing. Gone is the automatic right to have a refusal on the papers reconsidered at a hearing (known as a “renewal hearing”). In its place is a discretion to direct an oral hearing (a discretion which the judge must exercise if he or she takes the view that the permission application cannot be fairly determined on paper). However, this

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll