Q&As

Where an appeal is rejected by the Supreme Court at the permission stage by three judges, is there an ability to apply for a review of the decision?

read titleRead full title
Published on LexisPSL on 26/07/2018

The following Dispute Resolution Q&A provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering:

  • Where an appeal is rejected by the Supreme Court at the permission stage by three judges, is there an ability to apply for a review of the decision?
  • Challenging a Supreme Court Assessment

Where an appeal is rejected by the Supreme Court at the permission stage by three judges, is there an ability to apply for a review of the decision?

An appeal is not to be presumed, but must be given see: Lane v Esdaile. Leaving aside for a moment the question of leapfrog appeals, an appeal to the UK Supreme Court (UKSC) lies only from an order or judgment of the Court of Appeal in England and Wales in civil proceedings (section 40(2) of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 (CRA 2005)), and then only with permission of the permission of the Court of Appeal or the UKSC (CRA 2005, s 40(6)). Pursuant to CRA 2005, s 45, the President of the UKSC possesses the power to make rules governing the practice and procedure to be followed in the UKSC.

Practice Note: Supreme Court—permission to appeal summarises the rules from the relevant Supreme Court Rules 2009 (SCR), SI 2009/1603 dealing with permission to appeal to the UKSC.

SCR 10(2) provides that:

‘An application for permission to appeal must be made first to the court below, and an application may be made to the Supreme Court only after the court below has refused to grant permission to appeal.’

SCR 16 sets out the procedure which every admissible application for permission to appeal goes through, namely that applications are considered on paper without

Popular documents