No arguable grounds of appeal identified in preliminary issue as to whether company can be represented by one of its directors

Whelan J (nem diss): practice and procedure - company law - application to extend time to appeal - High Court held that one of the company's directors was not entitled to represent the applicant in the application for leave to apply for judicial review - High Court further held that no issue of EU law arose - the director had sought to apply to the Supreme Court for leave to pursue a leapfrog appeal which was refused - the director then sought to lodge his appeal in the Court of Appeal office - he was informed that this should have been done prior to seeking the leapfrog appeal - section 41 of the Companies Act, 2014 - director argued that this statutory provision entitled him to represent the applicant - director also argued that the prohibition on directors acting on behalf of the company was contrary to EU law - whether the applicant has demonstrated that he has formed a bona fide intention to appeal the order in question within the time prescribed by the Rules of the Superior Courts - whether the applicant can identify some mistake which caused him to miss the time limit specified for lodging an appeal - whether the applicant has demonstrated that an arguable ground of appeal exists - it was accepted that the director had satisfied the first two limbs of the test - failed to demonstrate any arguable ground of appeal - application refused.