The Issue
CPR 52.30 provides that a court may reopen a final determination of an appeal where it is necessary to avoid real injustice, where the circumstances are exceptional, and where it is proportionate to do so. Where finality protects a determination whose adjudicative foundation is itself challenged — because the anterior issues were never lawfully tried — CPR 52.30 is precisely the provision that applies.
The Law: How It Should Operate
CPR 52.30; Taylor v Lawrence [2002] EWCA Civ 90 — the power to reopen exists where a party has been the victim of a fraud, where new evidence demonstrates the process was unfair, or where there has been a real injustice that cannot otherwise be corrected. The threshold is high — but where the same court that made the disputed order is asked to confirm its finality, the appearance of impartiality requires particular care.
How It Operated in Lawrence v HNW
The CPR 52.30 application was refused. The Court stated there were binding issue estoppels and that the time had come to draw a line. The Applicants say each proposition rests on premises never lawfully determined — making the refusal itself an extension of the process-integrity failure. Non-adjudication cannot become lawful adjudication through procedural finality alone.
"The question is not whether one court reached one adverse result. It is that the same failure of protection recurred across courts, tribunals, administration, policing and oversight, making the pattern visible only because the case passed through so many forums."
— Open Letter to the Lord Chancellor, May 2026