Barton v Wright Hassall

[Deleted User]

Important Judgment from the Supreme Court today - funnily enough involving Wright Hassall. Sadly the Claimant (a litigant in person) lost. It's hard not to feel sorry for the Claimant, Mr Barton, as the Defendant shamelessly took advantage.

The judgment makes clear that all litigants in person are expected to familiarise themselves with the Court rules and that whilst you may get cut some slack, you won't with the fundamentals.

Their [litigants in person] lack of representation will often justify making allowances in making case
management decisions and in conducting hearings. But it will not usually justify applying to litigants in person a lower standard of compliance with rules or orders of the court.....
......Unless the rules and practice directions are particularly inaccessible or obscure, it is reasonable to expect a litigant in person to familiarise himself with the rules which apply to any step which he is about to take.
(Lord Sumption - para 18)

One might assume that the contrary applies. If litigants have complied with rules for service, for example, one can expect the professionally represented Claimant parking companies to get it right. For that reason, it may be useful to keep as reference material. Judgment and press summary below:

https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2016-0136-judgment.pdf
https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2016-0136-press-summary.pdf

Coupon-mad

Useful in other case, I agree.

Sounds like a typical hopeless case against a firm of solicitors by someone who thought they knew about the court process, acted gung-ho (led by arrogance? we've seen that before) but stumbled at the simple hurdle of having a valid claim!

The Limitation Act, not those rules, prevented Mr Barton from pressing his claim.

A cautionary tale in some ways. Perhaps a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, and certainly thinking he could beat a solicitor firm at the Supreme Court using some old doomed rubbish about the Limitation Act breaching Article 6 (if I read it right?).

Quentin

More discussion here:


https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5798428