Perotti v Collyer-Bristow (A Firm)(No 2)
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Lord Justice Brooke |
| Judgment Date | 27 July 2004 |
| Neutral Citation | [2004] EWCA Civ 1019 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Civil Division) |
| Date | 27 July 2004 |
| Docket Number | Case No: A3/2003/0552, 0552A, 0553, 0554, 0555, 0556, 0557, |
[2004] EWCA Civ 1019
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE
COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
CHANCERY DIVISION
Lindsay J
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand,
London, WC2A 2LL
Lord Justice Brooke
Vice-President of The Court of Appeal (Civil Division) and
Lord Justice Maurice Kay
Case No: A3/2003/0552, 0552A, 0553, 0554, 0555, 0556, 0557,
A3/2003/0558, 0559, 0560, 0561, 0562, 1608, 1610
The Appellant appeared in person.
The Respondents were not present or represented.
This is the judgment of the court.
On 21 st May 2004 we handed down our judgment in this case. It was sent to Mr Perotti in draft and arrived at his address for service on 19 th May, but he did not go there until after we had delivered judgment. We therefore directed that our order should not be drawn up immediately in order to give Mr Perotti the opportunity to make submissions to us as to why we should not give the directions suggested in paras 60–63.
In the event he sent us very full written submissions. We also allowed him ten minutes for oral submissions at the hearing on 29 th June but he preferred to take up the whole of the time allotted that morning to his submissions in the appeal relating to his action against Iliffe Booth Bennett and Others.
As is Mr Perotti's custom, he sent us very extensive submissions. While we are willing to consider "typing errors, wrong references and other minor corrections of that kind" (see Practice Statement (Supreme Court) [1998] 1 WLR 825, 827) we are certainly not willing to consider renewed submissions on the merits. After considering Mr Perotti's points, we direct that the following changes be made to the text of Brooke LJ's approved judgment ( [2004] EWCA Civ 639):
Para 4 Lines 3–4
Substitute: 'March 1992' for 'March 1991'
Para 10 Lines 2–4
Delete second sentence and substitute:
'This achieved nothing because Mr Perotti was unable to reach agreement with Mr Saner on the terms on which Mr Saner and his firm would be willing to assist him.'
Para 17 Line 2
Delete second sentence and substitute:
'Mr and Mrs Abbate served their defence...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Perotti v Westminster City Council
...restraint order should not be made against him: for the later history of this matter, see Perotti v Collyer-Bristow (a firm) (No 2) [2004] EWCA Civ 1019, [2004] 4 All ER 72). Mr Perotti said in his letter that he had been in the dismissal courts before but had never had anything dismissed.......