Page 2 of 2

Re: court staff v preacher

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 7:56 pm
by atticus
Then issue an application. Ask the Court to make rulings which accept your interpretation and to enter default judgment in your favour.

I don't give much for your chances, but I may be wrong.

If I am not wrong, have a cheque book handy so you can pay the costs.

Re: court staff v preacher

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 8:10 pm
by preacherman
atticus wrote:Then issue an application. Ask the Court to make rulings which accept your interpretation and to enter default judgment in your favour.

I don't give much for your chances, but I may be wrong.

If I am not wrong, have a cheque book handy so you can pay the costs.


well 14 days is fourteen days is it not?

the court said to me ' the last day for filling a defence in this matter was not the 22nd August as stated by you (and the notice of issue!) the 22nd August would have been last day to file a defence if D had not filed an AOS. However they filed an AOS on time, therefore acquiring 14 days for filing their defence'.

the AOS was filed on September 4th though (out of time).

10.3
(1) The general rule is that the period for filing an acknowledgment of service is –
(a) where the defendant is served with a claim form which states that particulars of claim are to follow, 14 days after service of the particulars of claim; and
(b) in any other case, 14 days after service of the claim form.

as a side note, this rule is a bit confusing when you see the new court form though. I thought 28 days was only when you receive the claim but no particulars, so you then get 28 days once you get particulars.

Defence
Cpr 15.4
(1) The general rule is that the period for filing a defence is –
(a) 14 days after service of the particulars of claim; or
(b) If the defendant files an acknowledgment of service under Part 10, 28 days after service of the *particulars of claim.


https://formfinder.hmctsformfinder.just ... n9-eng.pdf

the new form:
If you need 28 days (rather than 14) from the date of service to prepare your defence, or
wish to contest the court’s jurisdiction send:
the acknowledgment
of service

it still has to be in time though surly.

Re: court staff v preacher

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 9:19 pm
by atticus
Don't call me Surly!


(With apologies to Leslie Neilsen)

Re: court staff v preacher

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 9:23 pm
by atticus
As I said, you are at liberty to make your argument to the Court. You may also wish to refer to rule 10.2.

But I still think your application will fail. Why not deal with the issues?

Re: court staff v preacher

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 9:49 pm
by preacherman
well its just a complaint at the moment:
CPR 10.2 If –
(a) a defendant fails to file an acknowledgment of service within the period specified in rule 10.3; and
(b) Does not within that period file a defence in accordance with Part 15 or serve or file an admission in accordance with Part 14,
The claimant may obtain default judgment if Part 12 allows it.

I am not against dealing with the issue, but if I can save going to court against people who lets say might be untruthful, all the better.

Re: court staff v preacher

PostPosted: Sun Nov 05, 2017 8:57 pm
by preacherman
do you think you need to be legally trained to recognize when a staff member has said that something was 'in time', when it was not? or does the staff member need to be legally trained to recognize when something is out of time?

I am satisfied that Miss xxxxxxx response is both correct and appropriate. I would like to take
this opportunity to advise you that both myself and Court administrative staff are not legally
trained, therefore Court staff are trained to follow Court processes. All Court processes go through
an assurance check with the HMCTS rules committee which has members that are legally trained
and who are members of the judiciary.
Therefore whilst I am not legally trained and therefore cannot comment on the Civil Procedure
Rules you have quoted, I can with certainty state that Court staff have correctly followed Court
Procedures and the explanation provided to you by Miss xxxxx is in accordance with Court
procedure. Consequently I have found no evidence of maladministration of your case.

If however you believe that the Court has not acted in accordance with the Civil Procedure Rules,
you have the option of writing to the judiciary regarding your case to request that they review the
matter as they are legally qualified to do so.As the case is now held by the County Court at xxxxx
you will have to write to them directly asking for your correspondence to be referred to the
judiciary.

Re: court staff v preacher

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 12:51 pm
by atticus
In all the first class cutting and pasting, you may have overlooked that you have been given a pointer as to what you may do if you continue to nurture a sense of grievance:
preacherman wrote:If however you believe that the Court has not acted in accordance with the Civil Procedure Rules,
you have the option of writing to the judiciary regarding your case to request that they review the
matter as they are legally qualified to do so.As the case is now held by the County Court at xxxxx
you will have to write to them directly asking for your correspondence to be referred to the
judiciary.