or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments
Court of Appeal refuses application brought by the first defendant/appellant to amend his grounds of appeal in an appeal of a decision of the High Court granting summary judgment against him, on the grounds that: (a) the case law referred to by the appellant did not introduce any new rule of law or practice which changed the landscape, but was rather a restatement of the law; (b) the appellant did not raise the issues he now sought to raise at first instance before the High Court; and (c) the appellant failed to satisfy the Court that any injustice will arise in the absence of these new grounds being permitted.
Noonan J (nem diss): Summary judgment - practice and procedure - application by the first defendant/appellant to amend his grounds of appeal in an appeal of a decision of the High Court granting summary judgment against him - Order 86, rule 10(1) of the Rules of the Superior Courts - the appellant sought to amend his grounds to claim that the respondent had not properly pleaded the particulars of the claim and that there was insufficient evidence before the court of the type of business records carrying indications of reliability and there was not evidence sufficient to establish a course of dealing between the parties - whether the case law referred to by the appellant had changed the legal landscape - whether the appellant raised either issue at first instance in the High Court - whether there would be any injustice by refusing to admit the new grounds of appeal -application refused.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.