Judgments Link

Le_Kirk

Upon adding some new judgments and judge's directions to the existing dropbox link, it came to my attention that the link was being produced new every time rather than using the same link URL.. This means that newer posters using the older link may not have had ALL the judgments.  To prevent this happening, this thread can be used for the latest URL and I can update it more easily than having to trawl through the whole forum to find every instance of posting the link.
This is the most up-to-date link for Judgments
If regulars like @Coupon-mad and @1505grandad (other regulars are available) who point posters at it, can please use this thread URl, I will update the link on this thread when required.
ETA  Anyone finding this from the NEWBIES should also read what @Coupon-mad wrote on this thread about words to add when using the Judgments link: -
14 August at 8:52PM <<<< LINK

136_NW

The robust judgment of DJ Humphreys at Ipswich County Court (September 2023) is in sharp contrast to latitude given by Manchester County Court to UKPC/DCB Legal, recently, in almost identical circumstances.

Their claim against me was struck out following filing and service of a defence, but leave given to file and serve amended particulars of claim despite the court's attention being drawn to numerous CPR, PD and Protocol breaches in that defence.

The claimant's amended particulars were similarly inadequate - and did lead to an amended defence being filed and the court giving further directions, which included listing a trial date.

Upon receipt of which the claimants filed a discontinuation notice (on the very same day). 

All county courts and district judges should, by now, be getting wise to such claims and strike out at allocation stage. Especially the larger court centres, such as Manchester, where there must be multiple instances.

Coupon-mad

Le_Kirk said:

Upon adding some new judgments and judge's directions to the existing dropbox link, it came to my attention that the link was being produced new every time rather than using the same link URL.. This means that newer posters using the older link may not have had ALL the judgments.  To prevent this happening, this thread can be used for the latest URL and I can update it more easily than having to trawl through the whole forum to find every instance of posting the link.
This is the most up-to-date link for Judgments
If regulars like @Coupon-mad and @1505grandad (other regulars are available) who point posters at it, can please use this thread URl, I will update the link on this thread when required.

Thanks v much  @Le_Kirk

I will change the NEWBIES thread link to this thread.

Coupon-mad

A contact now has the transcript of the 'Mr A'appeal victory achieved by Jackson Yamba at Manchester court which clarifies the legal issues and is on a par with CEL v Chan.

I will get a Dropbox link sorted, unless @bargepole or @ParkingMad does it quicker

Le_Kirk

OK, I will drop (box) on it when you or one of the others, posts the link.

Grizebeck

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/bquflpb5171n24ry527f6/OT-APPROVED-BWLEGAL-K0DP5J30-CAR-PARK-AKANDE-10.05.24-MANC-J-v4.pdf?rlkey=6psnsut09j5ingppicv0r9x6c&dl=0

Le_Kirk

I am on it ........................... and ..................DONE!

Coupon-mad

Have all the regulars seen this?

CEL v Chan is not the only appeal decision saying the same thing about failure to comply with Part 16.

Where we talk about Chan we should now also talk about Akande.  Two Appeal Judgments!

Le_Kirk

@Coupon-mad, would it be a help or a hindrance if there were to be two links, one for them all and one for Akande as a stand-alone?  IMO it would confuse matters and is better left as it is.

h2g2

Also valuable note from that: do remember to give your representative (if you use one) a right of audience! It looks like that's the point that meant costs were not awarded.

Grizebeck

h2g2 said:

Also valuable note from that: do remember to give your representative (if you use one) a right of audience! It looks like that's the point that meant costs were not awarded.

Jackson yamba has an unusual arrangement where by he is a solicitors agent for another firm.
If it was a normal small claims case he would have had a right of audience via the lay orders howeve.
In this case he wasn't acting as solicitors agent 

https://www.lpc-law.co.uk/news/rights-of-audience-update-may-2022-halborg-v-apple-uk-ltd-o2-holdings-ltd/