KING'S BENCH DIVISION
ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
SITTING IN LONDON
B e f o r e :
____________________
VENKATESHWARLU BANDLA |
Appellant |
|
- and - |
||
SOLICITORS REGULATION AUTHORITY |
Respondent |
____________________
Michael Standing (instructed by Capsticks LLP) for the Respondent
Hearing date: 13.5.25
Judgment as delivered in open court at the hearing
____________________
Crown Copyright ©
FORDHAM J:
Introduction
Open Justice
Extension of Time: Taylor
By CPR rule 52.12(2)(b), an Appellant's Notice must be filed within 21 days after the date of the decision. This is subject to CPR PD 52D paragraph 3.3A, which provides that, where a statement of reasons for the decision is given later than notice of the decision, time runs from the date on which the statement of reasons is sent to the Appellant. Under CPR rule 3.1(2)(a) the court may grant an extension of time An application to appeal out of time is to be equated with an application for relief from sanctions, and the court will apply what have become known as the Mitchell/Denton principles (see Denton v TH White Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 906 [2014] 1 WLR 3926 at §24). The court will apply CPR 3.9, which states that the court will consider all the circumstances of the case so as to enable it to deal justly with the application, including a need for litigation to be conducted efficiently and at proportionate cost and to enforce compliance with rules, Practice Directions and orders. In applying the Mitchell/Denton principles, the first stage is to identify and assess the seriousness and significance of the failure to comply. The second stage is to consider why the default occurred. The third stage is to evaluate all the circumstances of the case so as to enable the court to deal justly with the application, including the first and second factors.
In his oral submissions the Appellant has reminded me of the overriding objective (CPR 1) and the interests of justice, which must be at the forefront of that third stage and the application of the Court's discretion.
Mental Health and Late Appeals: J v K
(1)The starting point in a case where an applicant claims that they failed to institute their appeal in time because of mental ill-health must be to decide whether the available evidence shows that he or she was indeed suffering from mental ill-health at the time in question. Such a conclusion cannot usually be safely reached simply on their say-so and will require independent support of some kind. That will preferably be in the form of a medical report directly addressing the question; but in a particular case it may be sufficiently established by less direct forms of evidence, eg. that the applicant was receiving treatment at the appropriate time or medical reports produced for other purposes.
(2) If that question is answered in the applicants favour the next question is whether the condition in question explains or excuses (possibly in combination with other good reasons) the failure to institute the appeal in time. Mental ill-health is of many different kinds and degrees
(3) If the tribunal finds that the failure to institute the appeal in time was indeed the result (wholly or in substantial part) of the applicants mental ill-health, justice will usually require the grant of an extension. But there may be particular cases, especially where the delay has been long, where it does not: although applicants suffering from mental ill-health must be given all reasonable accommodations, they are not the only party whose interests have to be considered.
Background
The Appeal
Case-Law
Capacity
Statement of Reasons
Where a statement of reasons for a decision is given later than the notice of that decision, the period for filing the appellant's notice is calculated from the date on which the statement is sent to the appellant.
10. Disputed Service of SRA Documents in India. The SRA claims that all documents related to the tribunal proceedings were served to the Claimant in India via his mother. However, the Claimant denies this, asserting that he only received the Tribunal Judgment and no other documents. The Claimant maintains that his mother did not inform him of any communication from the SRA. He believes that the SRA may have used local agents in India rather than UK-based process servers, leading to confusion and an improper service of documents.
11. Impact of Schizophrenia on Claimant's Ability to Act. After receiving the Tribunal Judgment, the Claimant did not immediately open or address it due to his ongoing battle with schizophrenia. Only upon his recovery and return to the UK did he review the judgment, realizing the SRA's allegations against him. His mental health condition, lack of internet access during his stay in India, and prolonged treatment made it impossible for him to appeal the judgment within the prescribed time.
That was a clear and explicit description of the Appellant having received an envelope which contained "the Tribunal Judgment". It matches the fact that there was an envelope that was posted and sent which did contain the Tribunal judgment.
Nature of the Delay
Reasons for the Default
I would like to inform you that he has suddenly left the country in mid-November and returned to India. He suffers from a severe mental health condition and I believe he has no plans of returning. As he refuses to see a psychiatrist and get assessed there was no paperwork to prove his lack of capacity. I request you kindly take further steps to ensure the clients are protected and look after the interests of Mr Bandla as the illness or its consequences are beyond his control.
The second piece of evidence is within the enquiry agents' report dated 14 December 2016. That report recorded the extensive efforts needed for the enquiry agents (Strategic Intelligence and Risk Services) to have been able to track the Appellant down to the address at the Manadal Village in India. The report culminates in recording that address, which was subsequently used for all the correspondence, and for service by process service on the three relevant dates (ie. 2 March 2017, 29 March 2017 and 1 May 2017). Within the body of that report the writers describe having made contact with the Appellant's ex-wife who had confirmed that he was in India and who had said that:
the reason for him suddenly leaving was due to him suffering a major nervous breakdown and he could not handle the pressure on him in the UK.
The enquiry agents' report goes on to say that the ex-wife confirmed the Appellant was not returning to the UK at any time. Those are the two documents which support there having been mental health issues for the Appellant in November 2015.
All the Circumstances
Strength of the Appeal
If the Tribunal is satisfied that notice of the hearing was served on the respondent in accordance with these Rules, the Tribunal shall have power to hear and determine an application notwithstanding that the respondent fails to attend in person or is not represented at the hearing.
The SDT was satisfied as to that statutory precondition.
Conclusion
Misleading CVs
Citing Fake Authority
R (on the application of Smith) v Parole Board [2005] EWCA Civ 188. This case involved an appellant who suffered from a mental disorder and sought to challenge a decision made by the Parole Board out of time. The Court of Appeal ruled that tribunals and courts must consider the mental health of the appellant and how it impaired their ability to act within time . The court emphasized that justice requires a flexible approach, especially when mental illness is a factor.
Order
Costs
Permission to Appeal