[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 >> Lysongo v Railtrack Plc [2002] EWCA Civ 24 (21 January 2002) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2002/24.html Cite as: [2002] EWCA Civ 24

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

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL
WITH APPEAL TO FOLLOW
IF GRANTED

		Royal Courts of Justice Strand London WC2 Monday, 21st January 2002

1. LORD JUSTICE LATHAM: This matter comes before the court as an adjourned application for permission to appeal a decision of His Honour Judge Knight given on 14th May 2001. It was heard first by Lady Justice Hale on 31st July 2001 at a hearing at which the applicant attended. Lady Justice Hale on that occasion adjourned the matter to be heard on notice to the respondents. It is in accordance with that order that the matter comes before us today.
2. The applicant has not appeared but the respondents are represented by counsel. The applicant was informed by letter of 7th November 2001, sent to the only address known to the court, that the hearing would be today. There has been, as far as the file indicates, no communication from the applicant. In addition, the applicant has been notified of the time at which this matter was listed again in a notice sent to his last known address. The telephone number provided by the applicant has been contacted. That apparently has been disconnected or is otherwise no longer in use.
3. In those circumstances it seems to me that the right course is for this court to dismiss the application. The applicant will, in those circumstances, have an opportunity to ask for the matter to be re-listed if he applies within the appropriate time and can persuade the court there are good reasons to do so. The respondent has asked for the costs of attendance today. The court required, in effect, the respondent's attendance by reason of the order of Lady Justice Hale. It seems to me that an order for costs should be made to be the subject of detailed assessment if not agreed.
4. LADY JUSTICE ARDEN: I agree.
Order: Application dismissed with the costs subject to detailed assessment if not agreed. Transcript of judgment to be supplied to the applicant.