Injunction in addition to monetary claim?

Bumble_Bee_4

This could be the wrong place to post but here goes.  

I want to use the small claims procedure to ask for an injunction against a local authority to force them to take a particular action.  And just claim a token amount of money (and explain it's a token amount because the action is more important, and the local authority is under financial pressure).

Has anyone here tried to use the process to get an injunction?

user1977

You'll need to give more information about what the "particular action" is, why even your "token" amount of money is warranted, and what steps you've taken so far (involved your councillor(s)?).

born_again

Why do you think SCC will force a council to take whatever action you are wanting them to do. In reality it is to claim losses. So do you have any actual losses.

Perhaps it would be better to get local MP involved if you want council to take action.

LinLui

The court has no jursidiction to do what you want. As has already been said, what you might be able to do (or not) depends on what you want them to do. 

Bumble_Bee_4

Thanks folks, that's disappointing as I thought I'd read that they could impose injunctions.  Wishful thinking?  It is action to comply with the Equality Act, so the monetary claim would be for being disadvantaged. Hard to put a value on that.

user1977

Potentially injunction and compensation, but you will need to give us more information than that if you want useful advice here on whether your claim is realistic. And as queried, what have you already done about it?

Hoenir

You perhaps need to consider using a solicitor to assist in this task. The paperwork needs to be correctly filed. 

Bumble_Bee_4

So has anyone here used the small claims procedure to try to get an injunction?

Alderbank

The normal track for an EA2010 claim is via a tribunal. Is there a reason why your solicitor wants to go to court rather than a tribunal? I can't think of one.

Injunctions can be dealt with in the small claims track if the court considers that appropriate. However there is uncertainty because injunction claims often do not involve a claim for money. The monetary value of a claim is the main factor the court considers when deciding whether to allocate a claim to the small claims track. You stress that principle rather than money is a factor and this is a red flag for SCC.

When considering allocation of claims that do not involve money, the court is supposed to look at the other allocation factors as set out in CPR 26.8 which lists the following:
(a) the financial value, if any, of the claim;

(b) the nature of the remedy sought;

(c) the likely complexity of the facts, law or evidence;

(d) the number of parties or likely parties;

(e) the value of any counterclaim or other Part 20 claim and the complexity of any matters relating to it;

(f) the amount of oral evidence which may be required;

(g) the importance of the claim to persons who are not parties to the proceedings;

(h) the views expressed by the parties; and

(i) the circumstances of the parties.

The main factor the court looks at is the value of the claim but when the claim does not involve money, it needs to give greater consideration to the other factors above.

If you want the court to treat an injunction claim as a small claim, you would be best to mark that on the claim form so that it comes to the attention of the court staff when it is deciding what track to allocate the claim to. Ultimately the decision on allocation is that of the court but if you make your preference known, the court might be more likely to accommodate it.

However there are long backlogs and great pressure on SCC. Unless you can present a compelling reason why this route would be better than a tribunal hearing I think the court officials would strike out your claim.

Sorry. I hope others might have a different view.

LinLui

If you have clear evidence that a local authority has not complied with the Equality Act, then there are much better ways of dealing with that than small claims. I agree with Alderbank about the tribunal. Although by far the fastest way to complain about an alleged breach of the law would be via your local councillors / via the relevant scutiny board. However, before considering a lengthy and potentially costly court case which may never get what you want (and you also may not win it) be careful to look at the circumstances objectively. Many people fail to understand the Equality Act and what it says / does, and substitute what they think is equality and not what the law says about it. 

You can also contact the Equality and Human Rights Commission who have the power to take action against a public authority if they fail to comply with their equality duties. If, as you say, money is not relevant and you just want them to do something, this is the simplest way. And if the EHRC doesn't see a case then it has cost you nothing to find that out. 

Edited to add - I just double checked with a colleague on the Equalities Team and the jurisdiction for Equality Act claims is the County Court (Sheriffs Court in Scotland) unless it is a broadly employment related (there are also a few small other exceptions). As I said previously, the small claims court does not have jurisdiction. They cannot dewtermine in law whether or not discrimination has taken place, so they could not either enforce an action or award compensation for it. Sections 114 - 140 of the Equality Act explain the jurisdictions. 

DullGreyGuy

Small Claims Court is one of the tracks through the County Court and can deal with some injunctions but most will go into Fast Track or Multi-Track. 

Whilst claim value is one dimension used to determine which track the claim is assigned to the estimated time for the hearing is the big one. Small track is 1-2 hours tops, Fast Track is up to 1 day, Multi-track is over 1 day. Obviously sometimes the courts get it wrong and think a matter will be short but it actually takes much longer but it's a reasonable yardstick.