Hi,
Can anyone shine some light on this question. But first a brief timeline of events. Back in the December of 2015, I successfully defended a claim, the Judgement given in my favour,
The claimant requested permission to appeal at the magistrates Court, but this was not granted.
The claimant voice the intention to approach the Court of appeal.
So now many month later I receive an appellants notice.
Permission has not been grant at this point.
The skeleton argument, will apparently will follow. My question is this.there seems to be conflicting instruction as how to proceed. According to C.P.R. 52 .19 the respondent is encouraged to submit a 'brief statement' as to why permission should not be granted, or the 'respondent need not do anything at this point', or once the appellants skeleton argument is submitted, a respondents skeleton argument is to be submitted. Any ideas ?
Can anyone shine some light on this question. But first a brief timeline of events. Back in the December of 2015, I successfully defended a claim, the Judgement given in my favour,
The claimant requested permission to appeal at the magistrates Court, but this was not granted.
The claimant voice the intention to approach the Court of appeal.
So now many month later I receive an appellants notice.
Permission has not been grant at this point.
The skeleton argument, will apparently will follow. My question is this.there seems to be conflicting instruction as how to proceed. According to C.P.R. 52 .19 the respondent is encouraged to submit a 'brief statement' as to why permission should not be granted, or the 'respondent need not do anything at this point', or once the appellants skeleton argument is submitted, a respondents skeleton argument is to be submitted. Any ideas ?
Comment