@ steampowered, I understand completely. I can assure you that you've conceptualised matters excellently and as a result your advice is spot on! Thanks again.

@ steampowered, thank you so much. You've made things so much clearer now. I genuinely appreciate your input and views.

@ steampowered, thank you for responding. To clarify, I would like to say as follows: 1. There was judgment in default entered against Persons Unknown 2. Four months later, the Claimant made an application that Persons Unknown be amended to my name. This was definitely after judgment in default was entered prior. 3. A Master presided over this application hearing and delivered an ORDER in favour of the Claimants and joined me to proceedings. My sincere apologies, I used the word judgment referring to the Master's decision, as I was ignorant to the difference between judgments and orders. Thank you for enriching my knowledge o this issue. I hope this clarifies the mention of judgment x2. The Master's order is highly contested as stated above and I contend that the Master had no jurisdiction to make this order after judgment in default was obtained. Please correct me if I'm wrong. I know that this is a bizarre situation, but it is the truth. 4.The appeal is based on appealing the Master's decision and permission to appeal has been obtained in the Queens Bench Division. Would you be so kind to elucidate as to what you mean by applying to the original court for an appropriate order (such as the judgment being changed or any injunction discharged)? Do you mean to set the default judgment aside? or are you referring to the Master's order to join/substitute me after default judgment was entered against Persons Unknown? Please explain. Given this additional information, what are your views on why the approved judgment is being withheld and the hearing is being regarded as "restricted". The categorising of the hearing as restricted comes as a shock , as no order was ever made to regard it as such. As a matter of fact, this hearing was opened to the members of the public. On contacting the court's transcript office and the Master's Unit today to query this restriction, neither had any information indicating or suggesting the existence of any ordered restrictions on their systems and they too were puzzled about this. I was informed that only private hearings have these restrictions on transcripts, however this restriction would only apply to members of the public and the parties would be entitled to a copy of the court transcript and the judgment. For the record, this hearing was definitely not private. Your views would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.

@ steampowered Thanks for answering. I was falsely accused of defamation.

Hi there, Views on this matter would be greatly appreciated. I had a judgment made against me by a Master in a High Court, in a civil claim in December 2013. This is highly contested as firstly,I am not guilty of what I've been accused of and secondly this judgment was made to join/substitute me into proceedings after judgment in default was obtained by Persons Unknown, some 4 months prior. I applied for Permission to Appeal and duly applied for a transcript of proceedings as per the usual procedure. This was in early January of this year. Eventually, I received a transcript of the proceedings and was awaiting the transcript of the approved judgment. Weeks passed, months passed....despite several follow up requests..still no approved judgment. I've been granted Permission to Appeal and still waiting for the approved judgment of the initial hearing. I was shocked to be told today that the Master contacted the transcription company and informed them that the hearing in December is classed as "restricted" and therefore no approved judgment will be issued. For the record, this was not a private hearing, it was just a usual everyday type hearing in the Masters Unit. I'd be really grateful to obtain your views on this. Many thanks

@steampowered...thank you. I appreciate your input and I'll definitely bear your advice in mind.

@Ganymede.....thanks for your question. To clarify, I 'm not trying to set aside an order giving the other side an extension to file further evidence...that would be somewhat petty. The real issue is: At the Permission hearing, the Judge made it quite clear that there was to be no further evidence brought into the appeal. At the other side's desperate request, the Judge conceded and gave permission for me to respond to a certain area of their submissions and specifically allowed only for evidence to be presented in respect of this response. Likewise, they were given the permission to address my response within 28 days and provide one tranche of evidence in this respect. Despite the fact that they had requested for me to respond to their submissions, they failed to file their response within the stipulated time and requested for an extension to do so. They then went above and beyond this further evidence which they sought an extension to file AND made three other applications for disclosure etc. It is the order granting these applications in addition to the extension which I would like to set aside. I contend that they've abused the appeal process and now seek to acquire fresh and new evidence. The evidence put forward at the judgment was flawed, hence my successful permission application. My concern is the lengths they will possibly go to, in order to manufacture this "evidence". Interestingly, at the application hearing, the Judge mistakenly thought that the permission to file further evidence was in respect of the applications only. Not realising that the applications were in addition to the bulk of "further evidence" that were late in serving. However, by then he had granted the applications. In essence, I appealed the evidence at the time of judgment, so I believe it is grossly disproportionate giving them a "second bite of the cherry". As previously stated, my concerns is how they'll arrive at this evidence that they hadn't presented before the judgment which I'm appealing. I hope this makes it clearer..

@steampowered.....thanks for our advice. An appellant's notice was filed, Permission to Appeal was given and a one day hearing was scheduled for this (now adjourned). I'm not clear regarding the case management orders though. Anyway, thanks a lot for your timely responses. I appreciate this.

@steampowered.....thanks again. This was a hearing instigated by the Respondents for their applications for disclosure etc. to be heard? The PTA was already done and dusted and directions were already given for the appeal hearing at the PTA. However, the Respondents made all these subsequent applications (4 heard in a day to be exact!). Are the orders originating from this hearing today regarded as case management orders? As I said before, one of their applications was for an extension of time to serve their further evidence. This evidence should have been served at the end of May, however they claimed that they were unable to comply with this as their response necessitated more "investigations" being done and they weren't able to collate all the evidence in time. They applied for an additional 10 days to so. The earliest date for the hearing to hear this application (amongst others) was today. Would you believe that, despite them not having had the permission to extend time (prior to today), they included all this evidence in the bundle. The Judge read the bundle and obviously thought this was all approved evidence. This was pointed out by me, but by then he had given his permission for them to procure further evidence from google etc. In view of the underhanded tactic of the Respondents, the Judge actually thought their application for extension of time was in relation to the google disclosure etc. as opposed to the documents that they were already safely secured and paginated in the bundle. I am so appalled by all the underhanded tactics and feel very strongly that I was taken advantage of and the entire hearing wasn't conducted appropriately in view of all these tactics. Am I still unable to attempt to set this aside? I genuinely respect and appreciate your advice. However, I am just dumbfounded by the blatant underhandedness. Many thanks

......accidental double post...

@steampowered....thanks again for your timely response. Believe it or not, the application hearing was today and the Judge granted all their application requests, which included (believe it or not), an extension of time to serve their "further evidence" and adjourning my appeal date! Please note that the google applications etc. is completely separate to the other evidence that they requested an extension of time for. I'm just dumbfounded! I am sure this sounds very bizarre....but it is true! I put forward in my witness statements all the valid points, such as, they could have procured this evidence with reasonable diligence before the judgment. I further stated amongst many other things that this shows that the evidence at judgment was flawed and they shouldn't be allowed to procure this evidence they now seek. The other side manipulated the situation and milked it for all it was worth. I am an LiP, but I have no doubt that this is well and truly wrong! Can you please advise, how I can go about setting this Judge's Order aside? The Judge is an HHJ. Would I have to go back to him to set it aside or will I be referred to a higher Judge? On making the application, may I ask ask for an urgent stay so as to ensure that the previous Order (HHJ's Order) remains unenforceable until the result of my application. To add to this, I quoted a case law which stipulates that a Defendant cannot be substituted post judgment by default. The Judge conceded that he had never heard of this case law. However, he added that if this case law is, as said....then, in essence this would be the end of things. Unbelievably, he stated that I should bring this up at the appeal. I am of the thinking that, in the interest of justice, this should have been dealt with there and then. The other side made the pathetic excuse that they didn't get enough time to research this case law and that it's not applicable anyway. I gave notice of this oral application, the previous day as this hearing was already scheduled. I am desperate to set this aside steampowered.....Please advise. Sorry to bombard you. Many thanks in advance.

@wonkeydonkey.....good question. I too am puzzled. The entire matter seems to be done in a very untoward manner.

@steampowered...thanks. The context is: It was a Permission to Appeal hearing. Permission was given. The Judge initially ordered that no further evidence to be served in relation to the appeal. However, the other side requested for a certain section of their submissions to be responded to. The Judge conceded and then gave permission for this response and allowed for evidence to be served in relation to this response only. He further ordered that the other side may serve one "tranche" of evidence in relation to the response they requested. The other side has however gone above and beyond to procure new and fresh evidence. In the middle of the appeal process, they are now seeking disclosures from google, new investigations etc. I have no doubt that this was a pre-meditated move by them to request for this response and they are now capitalising on this. In essence, the evidence they provided at the judgment was flawed, hence the appeal and subsequent permission. Am I right to assume that, what is being appealed is the evidence put forward at the time of judgment, hence they are now getting a "second bite at the cherry" and this shouldn't be the case? Does it appear that they've taken the context of "tranche" too far? Many thanks

Hi there A Judge ordered the other side that they are only permitted to serve one "tranche" of evidence. Can someone please explain what this means? Thanks

@Andy...your response has helped so much more than you'll ever know. Thanks so much...well appreciated!