Brevity also applies to Grounds for Appeal – Less is More

When appealing against a decision of a court of first instance, it is common for counsel to put forward an extensive memorandum of appeal which covers every single finding of a decision. Whilst this approach is common, it may not be advisable.

In a recent case of LZLabs Gmbh & 2 Ors v IMB UK Limited [2025] EWCA Civ 842, the Appellants filed an application for leave to appeal that included 150 separate complaints (within 35 grounds) against the trial judge’s findings (“Leave Application”).

The Court described this as a classic “kitchen sink” approach, observing that the Appellants were effectively seeking to overturn every adverse finding made by the trial judge following a 38-day trial. This is further demonstrated by the Appellants’ 80-page skeleton argument - more than 3 times the permitted limit of 25 pages.

The Court found that, despite the judgment being thorough and carefully reasoned by a specialist court judge, the Appellants’ attempt to challenge almost every aspect of it amounted, in essence, to an attempt to “re-run the first instance trial” which was one of the key reasons the Court refuse to grant the Leave Application.

As the Court observed:

“[176] When I first read the judgment in this case it struck me as a thorough and careful piece of work by a specialist judge with a firm command of the evidence given during a trial which lasted 38 days (including her five reading days) and which must have required extensive further reading out of court. It was therefore surprising to see an appellant’s notice which insisted that the judge got almost everything wrong. The appellant’s 35 grounds of appeal and 80 pages of skeleton argument have confirmed, rather than shaken, my initial view. They illustrate powerfully the truth of the old adage that less is more and its converse, which could usefully be borne in mind by those seeking permission to appeal in this kind of case, that very often more is less.”

The lesson from this case is clear: focus on your strongest points when crafting the grounds of appeal, rather than adopting a “kitchen sink” approach - which may ultimately sink your chances and dilute your key arguments.

In other words, less is more; and more is less.

See grounds of judgment here:

https://tinyurl.com/2c8wn7s7