Right of Attendance in Court

henrik777

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part27#27.9

Non-attendance of parties at a final hearing
27.9
(1) If a party who does not attend a final hearing–
(a) has given written notice to the court and the other party at least 7 days before the hearing date that he will not attend;
(b) has served on the other party at least 7 days before the hearing date any other documents which he has filed with the court; and
(c) has, in his written notice, requested the court to decide the claim in his absence and has confirmed his compliance with paragraphs (a) and (b) above,
the court will take into account that party’s statement of case and any other documents he has filed and served when it decides the claim.
(2) If a claimant does not –
(a) attend the hearing; and
(b) give the notice referred to in paragraph (1),
the court may strike out(GL) the claim.

(3) If –
(a) a defendant does not –
(i) attend the hearing; or
(ii) give the notice referred to in paragraph (1); and
(b) the claimant either –
(i) does attend the hearing; or
(ii) gives the notice referred to in paragraph (1),
the court may decide the claim on the basis of the evidence of the claimant alone.
(4) If neither party attends or gives the notice referred to in paragraph (1), the court may strike out the claim and any defence and counterclaim.






27.9 is for when you are not represented or present yourself at the hearing. People appear to be confused because Excel are thick.

Please decide the case on what we have submitted as we won't be there but we are going to be represented. Utter nonsense. Are they covering their bases in case the "advocate" gets to to go forth and multiply thereby admitting they have an issue ? :huh:


Rights of audience are explained pretty well http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2017/02/mil-lose-ms-kauser-denied-rights-of.html (read the links too)

Loadsofchildren123

Yes I thought that part of Rule 27 was for when there was no intention to appear AT ALL. It's not for when you want to send an advocate. And it doesn't get them round the RoA rules either.

The lawyers don't understand the rules. WHAT a surprise.

MA61

Loadsofchildren123 wrote: »

See comments above. I agree it would be useful for this to have its own thread.

Many judges are not interested in the RoA argument. So whilst it's correct to raise it, the judge may dismiss it. Litigants in person shouldn't be phased by this but shouldn't be put off running the argument.

Is someone please able to point me to the relevant directions / regulations for the above? I would be most grateful as I have a case tomorrow morning, thank you

Lamilad

Is someone please able to point me to the relevant directions / regulations for the above? I would be most grateful as I have a case tomorrow morning, thank you

The preliminary matters document (written by Bargepole) is here along with supporting transcripts.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/a1pxeqpztlhs5rc/AACwUBB1rKusiwjkBluqfiXBa?dl=0

It was written for a BW Legal case so para 8 will need editing.

MA61

Lamilad wrote: »

The preliminary matters document (written by Bargepole) is here along with supporting transcripts.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/a1pxeqpztlhs5rc/AACwUBB1rKusiwjkBluqfiXBa?dl=0

It was written for a BW Legal case so para 8 will need editing.

There is nothing that corrolates in the witness statement. Just a covering letter from Gladstones which simply ays "Please find enclosed by way of service upon you our client's witness statement"

It's not even signed with a real name, just a squiggle of GS

Coupon-mad

Solicitors don't have to sign with a name. They can just put 'GS' or 'Gladstones'.

However, the WS will have a name on it, and that person may not turn up (so object to that, as it means you can't cross examine the witness, which of course you want to because there will be rubbish you take issue with, in that WS).

nigelbb

DoaM wrote: »

I agree with the OP ... this topic deserves its own thread. That way it could be easily linked to for providing relevant advice to others in future.

In which case the thread title needs to be changed.

DoaM

nigelbb wrote: »

In which case the thread title needs to be changed.

In which case perhaps PM the OP to do so?