Monarch delays & Compensations. Listed flights denied in O.P.

LBD

Disclosure

31.5

(1) In all claims to which rule 31.5(2) does not apply –

(a) an order to give disclosure is an order to give standard disclosure unless the court directs otherwise;

(b) the court may dispense with or limit standard disclosure; and

(c) the parties may agree in writing to dispense with or to limit standard disclosure.

(2) Unless the court otherwise orders, paragraphs (3) to (8) apply to all multi-track claims, other than those which include a claim for personal injuries.

(3) Not less than 14 days before the first case management conference each party must file and serve a report verified by a statement of truth, which –

(a) describes briefly what documents exist or may exist that are or may be relevant to the matters in issue in the case;

(b) describes where and with whom those documents are or may be located;

(c) in the case of electronic documents, describes how those documents are stored;

(d) estimates the broad range of costs that could be involved in giving standard disclosure in the case, including the costs of searching for and disclosing any electronically stored documents; and

(e) states which of the directions under paragraphs (7) or (8) are to be sought.

(4) In cases where the Electronic Documents Questionnaire has been exchanged, the Questionnaire should be filed with the report required by paragraph (3).

(5) Not less than seven days before the first case management conference, and on any other occasion as the court may direct, the parties must, at a meeting or by telephone, discuss and seek to agree a proposal in relation to disclosure that meets the overriding objective.

(6) If –

(a) the parties agree proposals for the scope of disclosure; and

(b) the court considers that the proposals are appropriate in all the circumstances,

the court may approve them without a hearing and give directions in the terms proposed.

(7) At the first or any subsequent case management conference, the court will decide, having regard to the overriding objective and the need to limit disclosure to that which is necessary to deal with the case justly, which of the following orders to make in relation to disclosure –

(a) an order dispensing with disclosure;

(b) an order that a party disclose the documents on which it relies, and at the same time request any specific disclosure it requires from any other party;

(c) an order that directs, where practicable, the disclosure to be given by each party on an issue by issue basis;

(d) an order that each party disclose any documents which it is reasonable to suppose may contain information which enables that party to advance its own case or to damage that of any other party, or which leads to an enquiry which has either of those consequences;

(e) an order that a party give standard disclosure;

(f) any other order in relation to disclosure that the court considers appropriate.

(8) The court may at any point give directions as to how disclosure is to be given, and in particular –

(a) what searches are to be undertaken, of where, for what, in respect of which time periods and by whom and the extent of any search for electronically stored documents;

(b) whether lists of documents are required;

(c) how and when the disclosure statement is to be given;

(d) in what format documents are to be disclosed (and whether any identification is required);

(e) what is required in relation to documents that once existed but no longer exist; and

(f) whether disclosure shall take place in stages.

(9) To the extent that the documents to be disclosed are electronic, the provisions of Practice Direction 31B – Disclosure of Electronic Documents will apply in addition to paragraphs (3) to (8).

Back to top
Standard disclosure – what documents are to be disclosed

31.6 Standard disclosure requires a party to disclose only–

(a) the documents on which he relies; and

(b) the documents which –

(i) adversely affect his own case;

(ii) adversely affect another party’s case; or

(iii) support another party’s case; and

(c) the documents which he is required to disclose by a relevant practice direction.

Mark2spark

The last link says that it came into effect just 2 days ago.

Martin85

I received the following response from Europe Direct. I am a liitle confused. Is the European Small Claims Court for claims different from the small claims court in the UK or is it the same. It is interesting that they say the support of Spanish NEB should help
We understand your concerns regarding the handling of complaints under European Union (EU) law (Regulation 261/2004)*. However, since the company gave a negative response, it is always possible to make use of court proceedings, like for any piece of legislation. A favourable opinion from the Spanish NEB could support your claim. However, we cannot advise how successful your claim would be.

If applicable**, you may want to use the European Small Claims Procedure. It aims at simplifying and accelerating the settlement of small cross-border disputes and at reducing their costs. Following a judgment of the EU Court of Justice (case C-204/08), such claims may be brought before the court having territorial jurisdiction over the place of departure or of arrival, or in the EU country where the air carrier is domiciled. It is up to the passenger to choose. More information about the European Small Claims Procedure is available here:
http://ec.europa.eu/justice_home/judicialatlascivil/html/sc_information_en.htm

If you suffered loss or damage only the national courts can award reparation.

Please note that since there is a time-limit on most means of redress, unless you use them quickly, you may lose your rights.
If you have further questions, kindly contact the European Consumer Centre (ECC-Net) in your country of residence.ECC-Net helps consumers in getting the appropriate information in case of a violation of their rights in cross-border transactions and assists them in their contacts with the business operator.

A list of centres is available on the website of the responsible Commission department (DG Health and Consumers):
http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/ecc/index_en.htm

Please click on "Find a consumer centre in your country".

We hope you find this information useful. Please contact us again if you have other questions.

*Follow this path to access EU law: EUR-Lex > Simple Search > Natural Number > select document type, year and number of the legislation > press "Search". The "bibliographic notice" provides information on the document, such as dates, procedure and consolidated versions.

**To consult the scope of the European Small Claim Procedure, please go to the part "Scope of the Regulation".


With kind regards,

The "Passengers' Rights Team"/EUROPE DIRECT Contact Centre

Disclaimer

Martin85

I received the following response from Europe Direct. I am a liitle confused. Is the European Small Claims Court for claims different from the small claims court in the UK or is it the same. It is interesting that they say the support of Spanish NEB should help
We understand your concerns regarding the handling of complaints under European Union (EU) law (Regulation 261/2004)*. However, since the company gave a negative response, it is always possible to make use of court proceedings, like for any piece of legislation. A favourable opinion from the Spanish NEB could support your claim. However, we cannot advise how successful your claim would be.

If applicable**, you may want to use the European Small Claims Procedure. It aims at simplifying and accelerating the settlement of small cross-border disputes and at reducing their costs. Following a judgment of the EU Court of Justice (case C-204/08), such claims may be brought before the court having territorial jurisdiction over the place of departure or of arrival, or in the EU country where the air carrier is domiciled. It is up to the passenger to choose. More information about the European Small Claims Procedure is available here:
http://ec.europa.eu/justice_home/judicialatlascivil/html/sc_information_en.htm

If you suffered loss or damage only the national courts can award reparation.

Please note that since there is a time-limit on most means of redress, unless you use them quickly, you may lose your rights.
If you have further questions, kindly contact the European Consumer Centre (ECC-Net) in your country of residence.ECC-Net helps consumers in getting the appropriate information in case of a violation of their rights in cross-border transactions and assists them in their contacts with the business operator.

A list of centres is available on the website of the responsible Commission department (DG Health and Consumers):
http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/ecc/index_en.htm

Please click on "Find a consumer centre in your country".

We hope you find this information useful. Please contact us again if you have other questions.

*Follow this path to access EU law: EUR-Lex > Simple Search > Natural Number > select document type, year and number of the legislation > press "Search". The "bibliographic notice" provides information on the document, such as dates, procedure and consolidated versions.

**To consult the scope of the European Small Claim Procedure, please go to the part "Scope of the Regulation".


With kind regards,

The "Passengers' Rights Team"/EUROPE DIRECT Contact Centre

Disclaimer

LBD

Disclosure

31.5

(1) In all claims to which rule 31.5(2) does not apply –

(a) an order to give disclosure is an order to give standard disclosure unless the court directs otherwise;

(b) the court may dispense with or limit standard disclosure; and

(c) the parties may agree in writing to dispense with or to limit standard disclosure.

(2) Unless the court otherwise orders, paragraphs (3) to (8) apply to all multi-track claims, other than those which include a claim for personal injuries.

(3) Not less than 14 days before the first case management conference each party must file and serve a report verified by a statement of truth, which –

(a) describes briefly what documents exist or may exist that are or may be relevant to the matters in issue in the case;

(b) describes where and with whom those documents are or may be located;

(c) in the case of electronic documents, describes how those documents are stored;

(d) estimates the broad range of costs that could be involved in giving standard disclosure in the case, including the costs of searching for and disclosing any electronically stored documents; and

(e) states which of the directions under paragraphs (7) or (8) are to be sought.

(4) In cases where the Electronic Documents Questionnaire has been exchanged, the Questionnaire should be filed with the report required by paragraph (3).

(5) Not less than seven days before the first case management conference, and on any other occasion as the court may direct, the parties must, at a meeting or by telephone, discuss and seek to agree a proposal in relation to disclosure that meets the overriding objective.

(6) If –

(a) the parties agree proposals for the scope of disclosure; and

(b) the court considers that the proposals are appropriate in all the circumstances,

the court may approve them without a hearing and give directions in the terms proposed.

(7) At the first or any subsequent case management conference, the court will decide, having regard to the overriding objective and the need to limit disclosure to that which is necessary to deal with the case justly, which of the following orders to make in relation to disclosure –

(a) an order dispensing with disclosure;

(b) an order that a party disclose the documents on which it relies, and at the same time request any specific disclosure it requires from any other party;

(c) an order that directs, where practicable, the disclosure to be given by each party on an issue by issue basis;

(d) an order that each party disclose any documents which it is reasonable to suppose may contain information which enables that party to advance its own case or to damage that of any other party, or which leads to an enquiry which has either of those consequences;

(e) an order that a party give standard disclosure;

(f) any other order in relation to disclosure that the court considers appropriate.

(8) The court may at any point give directions as to how disclosure is to be given, and in particular –

(a) what searches are to be undertaken, of where, for what, in respect of which time periods and by whom and the extent of any search for electronically stored documents;

(b) whether lists of documents are required;

(c) how and when the disclosure statement is to be given;

(d) in what format documents are to be disclosed (and whether any identification is required);

(e) what is required in relation to documents that once existed but no longer exist; and

(f) whether disclosure shall take place in stages.

(9) To the extent that the documents to be disclosed are electronic, the provisions of Practice Direction 31B – Disclosure of Electronic Documents will apply in addition to paragraphs (3) to (8).

Back to top
Standard disclosure – what documents are to be disclosed

31.6 Standard disclosure requires a party to disclose only–

(a) the documents on which he relies; and

(b) the documents which –

(i) adversely affect his own case;

(ii) adversely affect another party’s case; or

(iii) support another party’s case; and

(c) the documents which he is required to disclose by a relevant practice direction.

LBD

Mark it must be in the first link, as he did say the early spring ammendments....... The jist of what he said was, that the overiding objective being both parties be treated equal and if a LIP was expected to comply with and adhere to the courts time frame then so were the "professionals" as we had and they had not they coudl only rely on the basic defence they submitted within the 28 days right at the start of the claim.

Wishful_Thinker

If applicable**, you may want to use the European Small Claims Procedure. It aims at simplifying and accelerating the settlement of small cross-border disputes and at reducing their costs. Following a judgment of the EU Court of Justice (case C-204/08), such claims may be brought before the court having territorial jurisdiction over the place of departure or of arrival, or in the EU country where the air carrier is domiciled. It is up to the passenger to choose. More information about the European Small Claims Procedure is available here:
http://ec.europa.eu/justice_home/jud...rmation_en.htm

If you suffered loss or damage only the national courts can award reparation.

Please note that since there is a time-limit on most means of redress, unless you use them quickly, you may lose your rights.
If you have further questions, kindly contact the European Consumer Centre (ECC-Net) in your country of residence.ECC-Net helps consumers in getting the appropriate information in case of a violation of their rights in cross-border transactions and assists them in their contacts with the business operator.

A list of centres is available on the website of the responsible Commission department (DG Health and Consumers):
http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/ecc/index_en.htm

Please click on "Find a consumer centre in your country".

We hope you find this information useful. Please contact us again if you have other questions.

Exreact from post 3223 What is The european small claims court. Reading through it appears using this method you will nt have to appear in court it is all done by post!!. Could someone possibly explain. Thanks

LBD

Will leave it to those much more knowledgeable than me, can only speak for the English small claims

diggerb

I have been waiting for moderation to take place regarding my case.
I contacted the moderators as soon as i received the notification,as ever Monarch did nothing and then contacted the moderators at the last possible minute(stalling for time!) anyway it did no good because by the time they made contact the earliest moderation appointment was after the hearing date anyway. So we go to court. Now proceeding to try and get all my ducks in a row !
All this time wasting and stalling by Monarch is becoming a real pattern, i am hoping there is some way of using this pattern as a stick to beat them with in court.

Mark2spark

I assume that's mediation