The Civil Procedure (Amendment No. 3) Rules 2003

Made18th May 2003

Laid before Parliament19th May 2003

Coming into force9th June 2003

The Civil Procedure Rule Committee, having power under section 2 of the Civil Procedure Act 19971 to make rules of court under section 1 of that Act, after consulting in accordance with section 2(6)(a) of that Act, make the following Rules:

Citation, commencement and interpretation

1

These Rules my be cited as the Civil Procedure (Amendment No. 3) Rules 2003 and shall come into force on 9th June 2003.

2

In these Rules, a reference to a rule by number alone means the rule so numbered in the Civil Procedure Rules 19982.

Amendments to the Civil Procedure Rules 1998

3

In rule 43.2(3), for the word “litigation” the second time it appears, substitute “proceedings”.

4

In rule 54.22—

a

in paragraph (3), for sub-paragraph (a) substitute—

a
the immigration or asylum decision to which the proceedings relate, and any document giving reasons for that decision;

b

omit paragraph (5).

Phillips of Worth Matravers, M.R.Anthony May, L.J.Stephen Oliver-JonesCarlos DabeziesSteven WhitakerMichelle Stevens-HoarePhilip RaineyTim ParkerJuliet HerzogNicholas BurkillAlan StreetAhmad Butt

I allow these Rules

Irvine of Lairg, C.Dated 18th May 2003

(This note is not part of the Rules)

These Rules make minor amendments to the Civil Procedure Rules 1998.

Rule 3 amends rule 43.2(3) to ensure consistency with Parts 44 to 48, and with the Regulations on conditional fee agreements made under section 58 of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990.

Rule 4 amends rule 54.22, which was inserted by S.I. 2003/364. Rule 54.22 prescribes the method of making an application to the High Court under section 101(2) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 (“the 2002 Act”) for a review of the decision of the Immigration Appeal Tribunal on an application for permission to appeal from an adjudicator. Paragraph (5) of rule 54.22, which for the purpose of paragraph (3)(a) defined “decision” by reference to specific sections of the 2002 Act, is omitted, and paragraph (3)(a) is amended in consequence. These amendments are made to ensure that rule 54.22 is consistent with anticipated new transitional provisions for the 2002 Act, whereby it is proposed to extend the scope of section 101 to apply in cases where the adjudicator’s decision was made in an appeal under legislation which preceded the 2002 Act.