The Court of Appeal refused an application by a self-represented appellant to adduce further evidence on appeal, where the appellant sought to argue that res judicata should prevent the decision below based on what a judge in earlier proceedings should have decided if all relevant evidence had been before that judge. The Court held this was a mistaken formulation of res judicata, which operates only to prevent re-litigation of a cause of action that has actually been decided, not to bind a court to a hypothetical outcome based on evidence that was never adduced.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.