England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM THE LEEDS COUNTY COURT
(HIS HONOUR JUDGE KAMIL )

		Royal Courts of Justice Strand London WC2A 2LL Friday 11 May 2001

1. LORD JUSTICE THORPE: Mr W renews an application for permission to appeal an order of His Honour Judge Kamil, sitting in the Leeds County Court on 3 April 2001. The application was refused on paper on 24 April for the following reasons:

"1. The order of 3 April is an interlocutory directions order preparing a developing case for its final hearing.

2. In that province the direction of the trial judge is particularly extensive.

3. There are no realistic prospects of success were permission granted."

2. The final hearing referred to in those reasons was fixed for 30 April 2001 at the Leeds Civil Hearing Centre with a time estimate of five days. The imminence of that final hearing led to the decision to determine an application by a litigant in person, on paper rather than at an oral hearing. Manifestly, were the application to have any merit, it had to be determined prior to 30 April.
3. The hearing fixed for that day duly took place and Judge Kamil delivered judgment on 3 May. In those circumstances it is impossible to discern how Mr W thinks that he can renew an application which no longer has any force or relevance. It has been overtaken by events. It is now purely history.
4. To call it a hopeless application would be no exaggeration. It is, in reality, an application, the listing of which wastes the time of a judge of this court, without the least prospect of any benefit to the applicant.
5. Mr W is no stranger to this court. On 21 December 1999 I refused an application for permission, noting that there had been previous applications for permission to this court in September 1997 and July 1999. Mrs Corcoran, the listing officer, received a telephone call from Mr W at 5 pm yesterday evening as she was closing the listing office, asking for a 2 pm marking. He was abusive to her on the telephone. Whilst she asked him to wait while she referred his application to me, he terminated the call.
6. In all those circumstances, I have no hesitation in directing that Mr W shall not be permitted to reinstate this application. It is knowingly and deliberately dismissed in his absence and it may not hereafter be reinstated.
Order: Permission to appeal refused.