Author: SB
Last saved by: vmartzou

B2/2001/2680
Neutral Citation Number: [2002] EWCA Civ 1562                                             
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE 
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) 
ON APPEAL FROM THE BIRMINGHAM COUNTY COURT
(MR RECORDER HARBAGE)
Royal Courts of Justice 
Strand 
London, WC2 

Tuesday, 22nd October 2002
 
B E F O R E:

LORD JUSTICE ALDOUS 

- - - - - - - - - - - - -
 
CHARLES GEOFFREY ASHLEIGH‑NICHOLSON
Claimant/Applicant
‑v‑
 
(1) CHIEF CONSTABLE OF STAFFORDSHIRE POLICE
(2) CHIEF CONSTABLE OF WEST MIDLANDS POLICE 
Defendants/Respondents 
 
- - - - - - - - - - - - -

(Computer‑Aided Transcript of the Palantype Notes of
Smith Bernal Wordwave Limited
190 Fleet Street, London EC4A 2AG
Tel No:  020 7404 1400  Fax No: 020 7831 8838
Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)
 
- - - - - - - - - - - - -

THE APPLICANT did not appear and was not represented 
THE RESPONDENTS did not appear and were not represented 

- - - - - - - - - - - - -

J U D G M E N T
1.	LORD JUSTICE ALDOUS:  On 23rd August 2002 Mr Ashleigh‑Nicholson's application for permission to appeal was listed for 10 o'clock before Keene LJ and myself.  We waited until 10.30, but he did not arrive and the court did not receive any message from him as to why he could not attend.  In the circumstances we gave a reasoned judgment dismissing the application.  We ordered that the order should not be drawn up for ten days to enable Mr Ashleigh‑Nicholson to apply to have it set aside.
2.	Mr Ashleigh‑Nicholson took advantage of those ten days and applied to have it set aside.  His explanation for not coming to this court arises from an application that was made to evict him from his home.  That application came before His Honour Judge Orrell on 21st August and was part heard still on 22nd August.  The order required Mr Ashleigh‑Nicholson to vacate his home by noon on 23rd August.  His priority was, according to Mr Ashleigh‑Nicholson, to deal with that situation rather than come to this court to press for permission to appeal.
3.	Upon those facts I can understand Mr Ashleigh‑Nicholson's priorities were to deal with the need to vacate his home, but there is no excuse for not letting this court know what was going on and applying for an adjournment.  However, I would have been prepared to overlook what had happened and would have allowed Mr Ashleigh‑Nicholson to make oral submissions to support his application for permission to appeal.  He again has not appeared and has not sought an adjournment.  I have reread the papers and am of the same view as I came to on 23rd August 2002.
4.	In those circumstances, his application to set aside the order is refused.

ORDER:  Application to set aside the order of 23rd August 2002 refused. 
(Order not part of approved judgment)

SMITH BERNAL WORDWAVE