What is the Judge up to?

The_Deep

But is it, we just do not know.

Could it be that the appellant in this thread was a real pain in the butt, and issued a frivolous counter claim, just like the recent punter who thought his time was worth £185 an hour.

DCodd

straighttalker wrote: »

Have a look at the meaning of the term "res judicata". Once an issue has been heard before a competent Court, it cannot be reheard again in a separate set of proceedings. It's to stop disgruntled parties issuing proceedings again and again until they get a decision that suits them. It's also to ensure that the system of common law and binding precedents aren't undermined.

If the Defendant in this case had included all of his claim for costs in that set of proceedings and the Judge dismissed them, his only recourse would have been to request permission to appeal the Judge's decision there and then or on paper shortly thereafter.

The case wasn't heard though and the Judge said he had not read the claim. Not sure "res Judicata" applies here. No matter had been Judged.

Fergie76

The_Deep wrote: »

But is it, we just do not know.

Could it be that the appellant in this thread was a real pain in the butt, and issued a frivolous counter claim, just like the recent punter who thought his time was worth £185 an hour.

Does it really matter if (s)he has been a real pain in the @rse? If they have incurred cost by the frivolous of the PPC, why should they be denied them?

If that happens to be £185 per hour and they can prove that, why should they be out of pocket? They never asked the PPC to issue them an invoice.

(Yes, I am aware costs are limited in the CC.)

bod1467

If costs are limited to the court-approved rate of £18 per hour, how can the fragrant Rachel or her buddy justify a £50 addition to PE claims? Are they really implying they spend close to 3 hours on each claim?

straighttalker

DCodd wrote: »

The case wasn't heard though and the Judge said he had not read the claim. Not sure "res Judicata" applies here. No matter had been Judged.

The matter of the Defendant's claim for costs was considered by the Judge and dismissed. The Defendant's counterclaim was also considered and dismissed so he can't issue another set of proceedings. If he did, DEAL could just refer to this set of proceedings stating that those issues were already considered.

bazster

straighttalker wrote: »

The matter of the Defendant's claim for costs was considered by the Judge and dismissed. The Defendant's counterclaim was also considered and dismissed so he can't issue another set of proceedings.

I'm not sure that's true. Seems to me that the costs and counter-claim weren't considered at all, indeed the judge actually declined to consider them.

The_Deep

I assume that even legal collosii such as County Court Judges are accountable to someone. There must be a way to get this looked at by someone higher up the pay scale.

straighttalker

As I said previously, the Defendant should have asked for permission for appeal before the Judge or made an application thereafter.

bazster

Appeal what? There hasn't been a judgment to appeal. Seems to me the defendant is perfectly at liberty to bring a claim if he thinks he has grounds.

waamo

bod1467 wrote: »

If costs are limited to the court-approved rate of £18 per hour, how can the fragrant Rachel or her buddy justify a £50 addition to PE claims? Are they really implying they spend close to 3 hours on each claim?

The rules for in house solicitors are different. They can claim a maximum of £50 per case. Whilst they seem to claim the full amount for every case it would be very difficult for the Judge to refuse it.