Small Claims - Representation
Discussion
twokcc said:
Same experience for me(having done more than a dozen-part of job)
Defendant has to submit details as to why the invoice hasn't been paid. (financial hardship isn't usually an excuse) before hearing date. Presume defendant hasn't given any explanation why invoice has not been paid.
If straight forward goods supplied and customer not paid-likely defendant wont even turn up for hearing and you will get judgement on day of hearing against defendant.
Suggest decide at time of getting details of defense if you want to proceed.
If debt is disputed can post on hear and get advice about it.
Is it a company or an individual that is defendant and whats roughly amount of debt- detail can help in making decision on best way forward.
Other ways to resolve the matter possible but these may have been explored already and failed
If the person has no meaningful defence then it can be struck out and judgment entered before it gets to any trial. Defendant has to submit details as to why the invoice hasn't been paid. (financial hardship isn't usually an excuse) before hearing date. Presume defendant hasn't given any explanation why invoice has not been paid.
If straight forward goods supplied and customer not paid-likely defendant wont even turn up for hearing and you will get judgement on day of hearing against defendant.
Suggest decide at time of getting details of defense if you want to proceed.
If debt is disputed can post on hear and get advice about it.
Is it a company or an individual that is defendant and whats roughly amount of debt- detail can help in making decision on best way forward.
Other ways to resolve the matter possible but these may have been explored already and failed
Cudd Wudd said:
Made me think of this recent Queen’s Bench Division case: https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/mckenzie-friend-... where an application to appoint a McKenzie friend was refused. The MF would be limited to providing ‘moral support’, including taking notes, helping with case papers and quietly giving advice on any aspect of the conduct of the case. The judge did allow those in court to use mobile phones, given the need to socially distance in court.
I wouldn’t recommend this response:
‘The judgment recorded that when Steyn refused the claimant’s application to grant Ogilvy a right of audience, her behaviour changed ‘very suddenly and dramatically’. She became extremely angry, shouting loudly at the judge and throwing files forcefully down onto the bench. She then appeared to sit down under the bench so she was no longer visible to the judge.’
There is a bit more to the background. I wouldn’t recommend this response:
‘The judgment recorded that when Steyn refused the claimant’s application to grant Ogilvy a right of audience, her behaviour changed ‘very suddenly and dramatically’. She became extremely angry, shouting loudly at the judge and throwing files forcefully down onto the bench. She then appeared to sit down under the bench so she was no longer visible to the judge.’
https://www.legalfutures.co.uk/latest-news/jail-ma...
Clearly that man is wholly unsuitable to be appearing on behalf of anybody in court except on his own behalf as the accused.
Fortunately civil procedure is "woke" enough to appreciate that some of those deserving of access to justice are not confident enough to run the proceedings, but that for the sums involved in small claims litigation, there's no budget for a legal professional.
So thankfully in small claims, lay representatives are allowed to present the case at a hearing, so long as the party they represent attends: https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/...
You could take the mantle of a McKenzie friend, however, as noted previously, you may be restricted to moral support and shuffling papers.
So thankfully in small claims, lay representatives are allowed to present the case at a hearing, so long as the party they represent attends: https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/...
You could take the mantle of a McKenzie friend, however, as noted previously, you may be restricted to moral support and shuffling papers.
Durzel said:
Good Lord, I read the decision linked in that article and there's a lot to unpack there. Interestingly as recently as yesterday the Claimant in that case made a plea for the judge to recuse herself from the case because of alleged bias. All in all her war with PwC has been going on for the better part of 4 years.
I do love reading the withering comments made by Judges about aspects of a case that are beyond the pale, like how the Claimant took 3 full months before attempting to file an injunction (which failed) on the afternoon before the hearing, and complained that her computer had been too slow to do it previously. The incredulity just drips from the judgement.
Regards the OP - as that linked case illustrates - a McKenzie Friend can basically assist the LIP in admin and quietly advise them, but that's it. The OP will not be permitted to act in the litigants stead simply because she doesn't feel up to it. As has been - brutally - said before, one must consider the implications for taking legal action. It is not a trivial matter and at the best of times there will be stress involved.
The best she can really hope for is that it gets settled before court, either during mediation, and if it doesn't she can always pull out before the hearing. The good news is that in small claims she won't ordinarily be on the hook for legal expenses, but a nominal costs order could be made against her if she acts in bad faith (e.g. doesn't turn up on the day, etc).
This cheeky chappy was the fake barrister in question.I do love reading the withering comments made by Judges about aspects of a case that are beyond the pale, like how the Claimant took 3 full months before attempting to file an injunction (which failed) on the afternoon before the hearing, and complained that her computer had been too slow to do it previously. The incredulity just drips from the judgement.
Regards the OP - as that linked case illustrates - a McKenzie Friend can basically assist the LIP in admin and quietly advise them, but that's it. The OP will not be permitted to act in the litigants stead simply because she doesn't feel up to it. As has been - brutally - said before, one must consider the implications for taking legal action. It is not a trivial matter and at the best of times there will be stress involved.
The best she can really hope for is that it gets settled before court, either during mediation, and if it doesn't she can always pull out before the hearing. The good news is that in small claims she won't ordinarily be on the hook for legal expenses, but a nominal costs order could be made against her if she acts in bad faith (e.g. doesn't turn up on the day, etc).
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.casemine.com/ju...
“ There was nothing further put forward in the evidence that could show a "far stronger case" by reference to Article 8 interests that could possibly begin to weigh against the strong public interest in this appellant's deportation.
Notice of Decision
177. The appeal under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights is refused.
Signed: Date: 9 January 2020”
The sooner he is removed the better as it appears he is a serial offender.
Notice of Decision
177. The appeal under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights is refused.
Signed: Date: 9 January 2020”
The sooner he is removed the better as it appears he is a serial offender.
Edited by Miserablegit on Friday 10th July 08:48
Despite what you watch on TV it’s not going to be a packed court rammed with legal types. Almost certainly a side room with a quick review of the paperwork and possibly a question or two from the presiding judge as part of the submission..
Being nervous is natural and something the judge is aware of and be sympathetic too. Defendant rarely show up so nothing to worry about if the invoice is sound and reasonable.
Being nervous is natural and something the judge is aware of and be sympathetic too. Defendant rarely show up so nothing to worry about if the invoice is sound and reasonable.
lostmotel said:
Fortunately civil procedure is "woke" enough to appreciate that some of those deserving of access to justice are not confident enough to run the proceedings, but that for the sums involved in small claims litigation, there's no budget for a legal professional.
So thankfully in small claims, lay representatives are allowed to present the case at a hearing, so long as the party they represent attends: https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/...
You could take the mantle of a McKenzie friend, however, as noted previously, you may be restricted to moral support and shuffling papers.
Pretty much what I did for my daughter when she sued a garage over the return of her car. Amazingly she won and got the car plus damages!!So thankfully in small claims, lay representatives are allowed to present the case at a hearing, so long as the party they represent attends: https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/...
You could take the mantle of a McKenzie friend, however, as noted previously, you may be restricted to moral support and shuffling papers.
ash73 said:
Women always fall back on their husbands in these situations, it's pathetic. Equality is just b
ks.
Have you got some sort of chip on your shoulder?ks.Quite simply regardless of gender, someone who is a bit nervous or anxious is reasonable to ask a more confident person to help them.
Is everyone who employs a barister pathetic?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff