BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?

No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!



BAILII [Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]

England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions >> Thatcher v Douglas & Anor [1995] EWCA Civ 38 (15 November 1995)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/1995/38.html
Cite as: [1995] EWCA Civ 38, [1995] NPC 206

[New search] [Help]

JISCBAILII_CASE_PROPERTY

BAILII Citation Number: [1995] EWCA Civ 38
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE
COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM PORTSMOUTH COUNTY COURT
(Mr Recorder Donne)

Royal Courts of Justice
Strand
London WC2
15th November 1995

B e f o r e :

LORD JUSTICE NOURSE
LORD JUSTICE HUTCHISON
and
LORD JUSTICE THORPE
____________________

RONALD GEORGE THATCHER
Plaintiff/Respondent
-v-
JAMES KENNETH DOUGLAS
and
DIANE LYNNE DOUGLAS
Defendants/Appellants

____________________

(Computer Aided Transcript of the Palantype Notes of
John Larking, Chancery House, Chancery Lane, London WC2A 1QX
Telephone: 0171 404 7464 Fax: 0171 404 7443
Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)

____________________

MR G LYONS (instructed by Peter M Ross, Havant) appeared on behalf of the Appellant Defendants
MR A PEARSON (instructed by Messrs Daltons, Hayling Island) appeared on behalf of the Respondent Plaintiff
____________________

RULING ON APPLICATION
 ____________________

Crown Copyright ©

    LORD JUSTICE NOURSE: We refuse the application for leave to amend the notice of appeal so far as it relates to all allegations against the learned recorder of unfair and/or deliberate omission or unfair inclination towards Mr Thatcher and his evidence. That means that we disallow the amendment proposed in paragraph A as it stands. We also disallow the amendment proposed in paragraph B, which is that the learned recorder was unfairly influenced by knowledge that Mr Thatcher's wife was sick. We also disallow the proposed amendment in paragraph C(a), which is that the learned recorder was unfairly inclined towards Mr Thatcher and his evidence by his reading of correspondence from Mr Thatcher's solicitor asking the Legal Aid Board to reconsider the grant of legal aid. We will give our reasons for disallowing those amendments when we deliver judgment on the appeal.

    We allow the alternative application to amend which has been made by Mr Lyons to this extent, namely, that the omissions relied on in sub-paragraphs (a) to (l) of paragraph A and the failure alleged in sub-paragraph (b) of paragraph C may be relied on in support of the general ground of appeal that the learned recorder's findings were against the weight of the evidence.

    That leaves paragraph D. At the moment we are not sure that that is an arguable ground of appeal, but we will not rule on it at the moment until we know more about the case and the way in which it is put by Mr Lyons when he comes to deal with that point.

    ----------

BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/1995/38.html