- Considered — C7 v Secrtary of State for the Home Department 2023-03-13
“…ow. The Court of Appeal has a discretion to consider a point not raised below, but the discretion will be “most jealously scrutinised”, see The Tasmania (1890) 15 App Cas 223 at 225 and the relevant considerations are set out in the White Book at 52.21.1.1. Mr Southey submitted that the Court should permit the point to be raised bec…”
- Cited — Zymurgorium Ltd v Hammonds of Knutsford Plc 2023-01-30
“…ing run differently (Singh v Dass [2019] EWCA Civ 360 at [17] per Haddon-Cave LJ). This is very well settled law and dates back to at least The Tasmania (1890) 15 App Cas 223 where Lord Herschell said at 225 that a point not taken at trial should be “jealously scrutinised” and that:…”
- Cited — Bilal Ali (as personal representative of Farzand Ali (Deceased)) v Laith Khatib (as personal representative of Fateh Bubu (Deceased)) & Ors. 2022-04-08
“…llowing a new point to be taken if further evidence would have been adduced at the trial, reflects longstanding practice: see, for example, The Tasmania (1890) 15 App Cas 223, 225 per Lord Herschell; Ex p Firth, In re Cowburn (above) per Sir George Jessel MR. As May LJ also made clear in his concurring judgment in Jones (para 52), t…”
- Cited — Colin White v Merwin Amirthan Amirtharaja 2022-01-13
“…idence or the evidence at trial would have been different had it been run below. This is very well settled law, which dates back at least to The Tasmania(1890) 15 App Cas 223.…”