When may an ordinary complaint be lodged, and what does the proviso do to one whose cancellation of the original ruling would achieve nothing?
General information · Not legal advice
Material to check
The practice file for this exercise holds the first-instance ruling complained of, the paper showing that the matter was not one reserved for an immediate complaint, and records of what has already happened under that ruling, so that the file can show whether cancelling it would still achieve anything.
These are types of material to look for, not evidence already verified by PRO SE.
Where readings differ
One reading takes the main clause at face value: an ordinary complaint may be lodged at any time, so no period runs from service of the first-instance ruling and lateness on its own is no ground for refusing it, provided the matter is not one for an immediate complaint.
Another reading turns on the proviso, which excepts the case where cancelling the original ruling 'has become pointless', so an ordinary complaint can still fail once the file shows that revoking the ruling would restore nothing, and the provision does not say who makes that finding or at what moment pointlessness is assessed.
Your judgment
What in the record could show that cancelling the original ruling would still restore some practical benefit rather than be pointless?
PRO SE does not make this decision or keep a case record on this public site.When to reconsider
We look at this again if the provision is amended to change the exception or to set a period for ordinary complaints, or if a court decision explains when cancelling a ruling is held to be pointless.