[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 >> Van Dijk v Wilkinson (t/a HFF Construction) [2001] EWCA Civ 1085 (5 July 2001) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2001/1085.html Cite as: [2001] EWCA Civ 1085

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) A1/2000/3877/APRIVATE 
ON APPEAL FROM THE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
(TECHNOLOGY AND CONSTRUCTION COURT)

		The Royal Courts of Justice The Strand London WC2A Thursday 5 July 2001

Thursday 7 July 2001

JUDGMENT

1. LORD JUSTICE LATHAM: Now that it has been appreciated that it is necessary for there to be an order permitting either party to put before the court any new evidence; and there being sufficient in the witness statements of Mr Harris and Mr Brown, who produce a number of background documents, to suggest that their statements may help the court, it seems to me that it would be right to give both the appellant and the respondent their respective permissions.

2. As far as the witness statements of Mr Robinson and Mr Langley are concerned, although I understand that there may be some dispute as to whether or not those are strictly relevant to the Court of Appeal, it would probably be better for me again to give permission for those statements to be adduced on the hearing of the appeal, rather than to leave the matter uncertain and require that matter to be argued in front of the full court. That means that the parties can decide the extent to which they wish to rely on those documents.

ORDER: The appellants to have permission to rely on the evidence of Mr Harris and Mr Robinson, and the respondents to have permission to rely on the evidence of Mr Brown and Mr Langley. Costs reserved. (Order not part of approved judgment)