Jump to content

resources

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    215
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About resources

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. 1. Not all members of this forum think to click on the button “new posts”. I was myself even not aware that this button existed. Moreover when I click on it several threads appear except mine which is evidence that having put all my threads together has somehow messed up the things 2. The fact that I have maybe or maybe not ramble in some of my previous threads does not mean that I will do the same in this new thread because each thread has its particularities. The consequence of putting all my threads together is that some members of this forum will be pushed off from responding to my new thread because as you say they will think wrongly that they are wasting their time which will deprive the others members of this forum and me from important information that we can get from my new thread if it was properly processed 3. My claim was struck out pursuant to CPR 3.4(2). My claim concerns the non-compliance of several laws. The judge has dismissed my claim because my claim concerning the non-compliance of these laws was hopeless except for one law but for this law he says that my case is not properly pleaded because I make reference only to facts but not to this law in my claim form and in my particular of claims. Therefore if I can prove that the judge is wrong at least concerning this point I can hope to have his decision to strike out my claim cancelled. I order to do so I think that it will be good we concentrate on the interpretation of paragraph 8.14 of the document “A_Handbook_for_Litigants_in_Person" and its link with CPR 16.2 and 16.4 which say that we have to provide a concise statement of facts
  2. It is also a question of accessibility because by putting all my threads together you force me and the other members of this forum to go through all my threads and their numerous posts to access my new thread which is not convenient
  3. It is the way I do the things. When there is still some doubts I do my best to find a solution to a problem. And to do this I have to follow all possible leads even though those which could look like being only details but which could nevertheless contain important information. I notice that some members of this forum have difficulties to accept when I am right and this leads to endless conversation. For example concerning the interpretation of paragraph 8.14 of the document “A_Handbook_for_Litigants_in_Person" if I am right I would like to be told that I am right or to be explained why I am wrong There is no need to put together all my threads to have enough background to understand my new thread because it has nothing to do with the other threads people could get confused if you for example mix up threads about employment with threads like my new thread about Civil Litigations
  4. This is a new thread which has nothing to do with my thread of three and half years ago. This is the problem with having put together all my threads. People get confused and mix up in their mind all my threads. Obviously this affects their replies to my threads I would have preferred to have my new thread kept separate
  5. There is plenty of confidential information in my claim form and if I want to blank all the contents of my claim form will not make any sense. The summary I gave to you is better. I did not know paragraph 8.14 when I issued my claim so it could not have been struck out because I relied on it. However it was struck out because I did not put forward the law which was broken and paragraph 8.14 says that I did not need to do so. Hence I would like to know if the judge erred in law but only concerning this issue because even if my claim was struck out for several reasons I am interested only in this reason?
  6. All this is too complicated I would have to buy tipex to blank some information and now the shops are closed and tomorrow is Sunday. You can believe me what is stated in my claim form is not so important. It will be something like A told bad things to B about me and B did bad things to me following the bad things A told him about me..etc i.e. only facts but no law I am more interested in knowing whether or not I am right concerning the interpretation of paragraph 8.14 of the document called “A_Handbook_for_Litigants _in_Person” and about any authorities linked to the issue raised by this document about law and/or facts in the claim form
  7. I queried about these three appendices because they could contain important information I am not aware of You make reference to appendix A and Y but not to appendix X which is this which interests me particularly because it concerns directly the drafting of pleadings which is relevant to the striking out of my claim. I would like to know its contents in case it has important information Maybe Appendix X and the other two Appendices are in a separate document but I do not know which The foreword says that this handbook is specifically aimed to the multi-track because it is very big and some information on it could be relevant only to the multi-track but this does not mean that some information on it which are general information cannot apply also to the small track. This is confirmed because it is made several references to the small claims in this handbook My claim has been issued as a small claim but the judge in his judgement said that it should go to the multi-track because it is too complex Yes this document is only guidance but it is confirmed by CPR 16.2 and 16.4 which says that the claimant should provide a concise statement of facts and not of the law in the claim form and in the particulars of claim. It is also confirmed by the Oxford definition of a cause of action I cannot copy and paste the contents of my claim form because it contains confidential information. However it does not make any reference to the law and the defendant in his application to strike out queried about what my claim could be and he put some assumptions about which law could be concerned by my claim and in my witness statement in reply to this application to strike out I put forward which laws I considered have been broken but the judge told me that it was too late because this information should have been set out in my claim form
  8. Another problem that I have in that in this document “A_Handbook_for_Litigants_in_Person" that we can find in the website https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/JCO/Documents/Guidance/A_Handbook_for_Litigants_in_Person.pdf it is made reference to Appendix A, X and Y. However when I use the 'Find' facility of my computer to find them I cannot find them. I would like to know if you can explain me how to find these three appendixes
  9. Yes I will put forward all the things you say but this would not be enough if I do not succeed to prove that the judge was wrong in law when he considered that my case was not properly pleaded because in my claim form I make reference only to the facts and not to the laws This document A_Handbook_for_Litigants_in_Person” comes from the website https://www.judiciary.gov.uk which seems to come from the Government but I do not know if it comes from the Ministry of Justice and if it is the law or simple guidance. We can appeal only on a point of law. Moreover I need to be sure that I interpret paragraph 8.14 of this document properly It will be good also if I can strengthen my ground of appeal with some authorities which confirm this paragraph 8.14 Hence the issue is to clarify if whether or not in the claim form we need to put forward only the facts and not the law and the evidence. The law along with the evidence being put forward later in witness statements for the full hearing or in witness statements in reply to applications to strike out.
  10. I have already make an application for permission to appeal which was refused on papers and I have renewed it an an oral hearing and I am preparing this hearing. What the judge told me is certainly relevant but he told me nothing more than I already told you. Moreover my only ground of appeal is paragraph 8.14 of this document called “A_Handbook_for_Litigants _in_Person” in particular the passage which says “The old adage ‘Facts not law; Facts not evidence’ remains as true today as ever. It means that you do not have to set out the legal basis of your claim in your pleading, simply the facts that go to make up your claim”
  11. In my claim form I did not make any reference to a particular law being broken and the defendant has taken advantage of this to make an application to strike out. In my reply to this application I say that the facts to which I made reference in my claim form related to breaches of a particular of law. However the judge says that my claim as pleaded does not concern breach of this particular law because I did not make any reference to this particular law in my claim form and as a consequence he has struck out my claim Irrespectively of what the judge says the issue is whether or not what is stated in 8.14 is correct or not i.e. whether or not the following passage is correct? “The old adage ‘Facts not law; Facts not evidence’ remains as true today as ever. It means that you do not have to set out the legal basis of your claim in your pleading, simply the facts that go to make up your claim” I would like to know also if you know authorities which confirm this passage because I need evidence if I want to appeal against the decision to strike out my claim because after all this document called “A_Handbook_for_Litigants_in_Person” seems to be only guidance and not the law?
  12. I would be grateful to you if you put back my thread as a new thread and separate thread in the General Legal Issue subforum because this thread has nothing to do with my previous threads. Otherwise people will get confused This new thread has nothing to do with Employment Law
  13. A small claim against a public body for harassment. It was struck out not because the claim itself but because I explained the facts in the claim form but not the law which has been broken even though according to me these facts related to the law which was broken. I explained the law which was broken in a witness statement that I filed later but the judge told me that it was too late and I should have put this explanation in the claim form itself. However this Handbook for Litigants in Person says in its chapter 8.4 that to put forward in the claim form the facts only suffices
  14. I have found in the following website https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/JCO/Documents/Guidance/A_Handbook_for_Litigants_in_Person.pdf a document called “A_Handbook_for_Litigants_in_Person” This seems a useful document. However in chapter 8.4 of this document I have found something strange because it is stated “8.14 Provided you set out your case on all the facts necessary to prove your claim your pleading will pass muster. Make sure that the facts are set out in chronological order and that you do no more than summarise them. The full details of the relevant facts will be set out later in your witness statements. The old adage ‘Facts not law; Facts not evidence’ remains as true today as ever. It means that you do not have to set out the legal basis of your claim in your pleading, simply the facts that go to make up your claim. Further, you do not set out the evidence, ie the details, just the basic facts that go to make up your claim Note down the elements of your cause of action, and make sure that you are in a position to prove the facts necessary to make good each element” We can notice the passage “The old adage ‘Facts not law; Facts not evidence’ remains as true today as ever. It means that you do not have to set out the legal basis of your claim in your pleading, simply the facts that go to make up your claim” Which is very strange because it says that I do not have to set out the legal basis of my claim in my pleading simply the facts that go to make up my claim. However I did like this and my claim was struck out because the judge says that it was not properly pleaded because I put forward the facts but not the law in my claim form. Therefore I would like to know if this documents which has been written by six circuit judges is accurate?
×
×
  • Create New...