Taking The Airlines To Court

lucyonline

Hello helpful people!
So I submitted my claim against Iberia through MCOL a few weeks ago as advised by you. I rather naively hoped they wouldn't respond and it would all be over quickly, but they have. I've had two letters through, one saying my case has been moved to Liverpool County Court (I live in London) and one saying that Iberia intend to defend all of the claim.
I was wondering if you could tell me what happens next? I assume I have to wait for their defence, which will no doubt be long and wordy and technical. Do I then have to submit a counter argument to each of their points? I'm not a lawyer and have no idea how I would even begin to go about doing this. Will I have to go to Liverpool and attend court? To do that would involve losing a day's pay (I'm freelance) and travel costs. Suddenly this is all sounding rather more traumatic, time consuming, and costly than it may be worth...
I don't see how they can defend when AESA have already examined their explanation for my delay and ruled that they do owe me compensation...?
Thanks in advance for your help.

legal_magpie

lucyonline wrote: »

I was wondering if you could tell me what happens next? I assume I have to wait for their defence, which will no doubt be long and wordy and technical.

Correct. The case ha been transferred to Liverpool because one judge there is dealing with very many airline cases for consistency as he has acquired a lot of knowledge in this area of law. You can request a transfer to your local court.

Do I then have to submit a counter argument to each of their points? I'm not a lawyer and have no idea how I would even begin to go about doing this.

The Court will give you directions as to what to do which will probably require you to submit any documents on which you intend to rely 14 days before the hearing. You may wish to prepare a skeleton argument but nothing will happen until they file their detailed defence.

Will I have to go to Liverpool and attend court?

Possibly unless the case is transferred but if your case is dependent on one of the appeals going through the Courts nothing will happen for a while.

To do that would involve losing a day's pay (I'm freelance) and travel costs.

If you win you can claim your travel costs and up to £90 loss of earnings.

Suddenly this is all sounding rather more traumatic, time consuming, and costly than it may be worth.

Entirely a matter for you.

I don't see how they can defend when AESA have already examined their explanation for my delay and ruled that they do owe me compensation...?

Because this is the real world
JJ

Vauban

lucyonline wrote: »

Hello helpful people!
So I submitted my claim against Iberia through MCOL a few weeks ago as advised by you. I rather naively hoped they wouldn't respond and it would all be over quickly, but they have. I've had two letters through, one saying my case has been moved to Liverpool County Court (I live in London) and one saying that Iberia intend to defend all of the claim.
I was wondering if you could tell me what happens next? I assume I have to wait for their defence, which will no doubt be long and wordy and technical. Do I then have to submit a counter argument to each of their points? I'm not a lawyer and have no idea how I would even begin to go about doing this. Will I have to go to Liverpool and attend court? To do that would involve losing a day's pay (I'm freelance) and travel costs. Suddenly this is all sounding rather more traumatic, time consuming, and costly than it may be worth...
I don't see how they can defend when AESA have already examined their explanation for my delay and ruled that they do owe me compensation...?
Thanks in advance for your help.

You might also want to take a look at this: http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=64719163&postcount=4493

In practice, I imagine that your case won't proceed in advance of the Huzar appeal in May. (Have a search for the background.)

If you start legal proceedings, you really must read up and be across the process. You can't do this half-heartedly. If you're unsure, a reputable NWNF is a good compromise, IMHO.

batman44

My case has been allocated to my local court about 3-4 weeks ago, not had anything back from them as yet, I have prepped my case according to the defence sent me at the start of my case, I may not need the detailed statement of case so i am waiting on the directions from the court. I suspect this is being held as long as possible as I refused a stay, I would expect a confirmation about this anytime soon. My bundle is all ready to be sorted in sections, paged numbered and divided and volumed, and then printed, so it is a case of waiting on instruction now and any extra that needs to be added.

lucyonline

Vauban wrote: »

In practice, I imagine that your case won't proceed in advance of the Huzar appeal in May. (Have a search for the background.)

If you start legal proceedings, you really must read up and be across the process. You can't do this half-heartedly. If you're unsure, a reputable NWNF is a good compromise, IMHO.

Thanks Vauban for this helpful link and advice. I may very well do as you suggest and find a NWNF, mostly on the basis that I may well be too busy to take this on and it's never been about the money, it's just about the principle, so even if I have to pay someone else to do it I won't mind as long as Iberia are proved wrong! Can you suggest a reputable one or advise how I might tell if they're reputable? I found one online called Bott & Co Aviation (I'd post a link but the site won't let me) and think they look ok but have no idea if that's true...

Thanks again for taking up so much of your time answering everyone's questions!

batman44

lucyonline wrote: »

Thanks Vauban for this helpful link and advice. I may very well do as you suggest and find a NWNF, mostly on the basis that I may well be too busy to take this on and it's never been about the money, it's just about the principle, so even if I have to pay someone else to do it I won't mind as long as Iberia are proved wrong! Can you suggest a reputable one or advise how I might tell if they're reputable? I found one online called Bott & Co Aviation (I'd post a link but the site won't let me) and think they look ok but have no idea if that's true...

Thanks again for taking up so much of your time answering everyone's questions!

Hi Lucyonline, i am not one to advocate but you will find that particular company is very good so i understand. There is a thread on here for them if you search.

Vauban

I hope you may have seen my write up of victory in court against Monarch Airlines this week (http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=64739956&postcount=426).

I thought it might be of some interest if I posted up the full skeleton arguments that Monarch deployed during the first two hearings. I say arguments in the plural because Monarch in fact amended their second skeleton argument to take account of Huzar in an effort to persuade the Judge that HHJ Platts got it wrong ...

You can find links to both documents below:

Monarch’s Skeleton Argument, 27 Sept 2013: https://www.dropbox.com/s/j7skl0zr1qxmwg4/Defendant's Skeleton Argument Longden v Monarch 3QT19970 27 Sept 2013.pdf

Monarch’s Skeleton Argument, 16 Dec 2013: https://www.dropbox.com/s/ks7njdwdxx9do94/Defendant's Skeleton Argument Longden v Monarch 3QT19970 16 Dec 2013.pdf

In many respects, my case was pretty bog standard: a technical defect affecting the plane on a previous flight. So I imagine that Monarch will seek to deploy similar arguments for other such cases. It might be quite fun to do a proper dissection of these arguments, if anyone is up for that?

One final point: the skeleton arguments were by far the most compelling and impressive documents I ever received from Monarch. I assume this is because they were not written by Monarch themselves but by the barristers’ chambers that the airline employed to fight my case. I doff my proverbial (and nice) hat to the barrister concerned, who was very impressive in court, utterly engaging out of it, and very professional throughout.

legal_magpie

Brilliant documents. But what happened after the second hearing?

Vauban

legal_magpie wrote: »

Brilliant documents. But what happened after the second hearing?

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=64739995&postcount=427

batman44

The documents gives you a good insight on the defence thinking. They seem to be most reliant on the NEB Guidelines, no basis in law, and twist the wording of the actual Wallentin case law.
How can they tell the judge that this NEB list is from the actual policy from the EU?:mad: