 |  |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|  | |  | |
Proposal 43
All appeals from the Court of First Instance to the Court of Appeal (and not merely
interlocutory appeals as proposed in Proposal 42) should be subject to a requirement of
leave.
Proposal 43 (for introducing a requirement for leave to appeal against a final judgment of
the CFI) should not be adopted.
Proposal 44
Leave to appeal should only be granted where the court considers that the appeal would
have a real prospect of success or that there is some other compelling reason why the appeal
should be heard.
Leave to appeal from the CFI judge to the Court of Appeal should only be granted where the
court considers that the appeal would have a reasonable prospect of success or that there is
some other compelling reason why the appeal should be heard.
Proposal 45
Leave to appeal from case management decisions should generally not be granted unless the
case raises a point of principle of sufficient significance to justify the adverse procedural
and costs consequences of permitting the appeal to proceed.
Proposal
45 (for a rule against granting leave to appeal from case management decisions
unless a significant point of principle is raised) should not be adopted.
Proposal 46
Leave to appeal from a decision itself given on appeal should generally not be granted
unless the case raises an important point of principle or practice or some other compelling
reason exists for the grant of leave.
Proposal 46 (for a rule generally against granting leave to appeal from a decision itself given
on appeal) should not be adopted.
|
 |
|