This judgment summary provides useful guidance where HHJ Tindal considers whether there was a ‘read-across’ from s 42(3) SCA into PD 3C for the appropriate test for ‘permission to apply’ under a civil restraint order (CRO). He clarifies the test as being the well-known ‘realistic as opposed to fanciful prospect of success’ test which recurs throughout the CPR. He provides practitioners with clear guidance on applying this test under a CRO.
To find out more and to read the Counsel’s full summary click here: https://financialremediesjournal.com/content/duncan-needham-v-susan-rosemary-ellis-2024-ewcc-29.616da43f9d974b1fbd38bcbcbbd8f0fc.htm