Pre-emptive N180 DQs, coincidence or malice? |
Pre-emptive N180 DQs, coincidence or malice? |
Sun, 7 Aug 2022 - 22:20
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Life Member Posts: 24,213 Joined: 9 Sep 2004 From: Reading Member No.: 1,624 |
I am currently involved in defending a civil claim (potentially several unrelated claims, but that's a story for another day).
Nearly 2 months ago I filed the defence. 2 days later (from the records on MCOL) the case was assigned to the home court - although I received no notification of this. About 2 weeks later, the claimant's solicitors pre-emptively filed (and sent me a copy of) the DQ that were expected to be sent to the parties in due course. A few days ago, I received a snotty letter (General Form of Judgment or Order) from the court telling me that if I did not file the DQ within 7 days the defence would be struck out. If I had received one, I would have already done so! Obtaining an N180 form (current version, not the 2014 version sent by the claimant) is trivial, as are the questions, but it makes me wonder As far as I am aware, I do not have an issue with post going missing, but most of the post I receive is junk mail, so I wouldn't necessarily notice. -------------------- Andy
Some people think that I make them feel stupid. To be fair, they deserve most of the credit. |
|
|
Advertisement |
Sun, 7 Aug 2022 - 22:20
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Sun, 7 Aug 2022 - 22:30
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 33,610 Joined: 2 Apr 2008 From: Not in the UK Member No.: 18,483 |
The knee-jerk own-motion unless order is an interesting approach.
-------------------- Moderator
Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed. |
|
|
Sun, 7 Aug 2022 - 23:05
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Life Member Posts: 24,213 Joined: 9 Sep 2004 From: Reading Member No.: 1,624 |
Slightly confused as knee-jerk (reactive) and own-motion (proactive) appear to be contradictory.
-------------------- Andy
Some people think that I make them feel stupid. To be fair, they deserve most of the credit. |
|
|
Sun, 7 Aug 2022 - 23:28
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 33,610 Joined: 2 Apr 2008 From: Not in the UK Member No.: 18,483 |
Slightly confused as knee-jerk (reactive) and own-motion (proactive) appear to be contradictory. Knee-jerk as in prompted by the claimant’s form, own motion as in neither party applied for it. -------------------- Moderator
Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed. |
|
|
Mon, 8 Aug 2022 - 05:39
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,074 Joined: 17 Nov 2015 Member No.: 80,686 |
|
|
|
Mon, 8 Aug 2022 - 09:56
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
A few days ago, I received a snotty letter (General Form of Judgment or Order) from the court telling me that if I did not file the DQ within 7 days the defence would be struck out. I suspect they received the DQ from the claimant and just assumed it had been sent out and you hadn't bothered replying. There is a tendency in the courts to follow a tick-box exercise approach and just go by whatever the latest document in the file is. I have a case I'm trying to sort out at the moment where the defendant filed an application to strike-out and a defence, the court issued a CCJ. When this was pointed out they set aside the CCJ, but didn't list the strike out for a hearing (we asked and paid for a hearing in the hope of reducing the scope for errors). So now we're arguing with the admin staff that if you file an application and pay the appropriate fee, they have no discretion not to list the matter before a judge. I was actually going to ask SP, if the administrative shenanigans lead to wasted costs, is there any reason in principle not to pursue a wasted costs order against HMCTS / the MOJ? -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Mon, 8 Aug 2022 - 10:32
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 33,610 Joined: 2 Apr 2008 From: Not in the UK Member No.: 18,483 |
I was actually going to ask SP, if the administrative shenanigans lead to wasted costs, is there any reason in principle not to pursue a wasted costs order against HMCTS / the MOJ? Yes. Wasted costs orders (r 46.8) can only be made against a legal representative. In any case, as Coulson LJ said in Anwer v Central Bridging Loans Ltd “Judges and court officials cannot be liable in law to litigants, in either damages or costs.” -------------------- Moderator
Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed. |
|
|
Mon, 8 Aug 2022 - 11:37
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
Going into purely speculative territory, administrative actions of the court are, well, administrative. In an extreme case, would it be an option to either join HMCTS as a party or bring a JR?
-------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Mon, 8 Aug 2022 - 15:06
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 33,610 Joined: 2 Apr 2008 From: Not in the UK Member No.: 18,483 |
I don’t think you’d get permission to join them as a party, due to no cause of action (in damages or costs, per Anwer). As to JR, it depends on whether the act was truly administrative or in fact a judicial act, i.e. a case management decision.
-------------------- Moderator
Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed. |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 20:41 |