Hfc/Restons default judgement/co - struck out - now new claim!!

[citizenB]

Have moved this to the legal issues forum as a claim has been issued against you.

 

I will also amend the title a bit to reflect claim issued.

[citizenB]

Below are a couple of posts re the re issuing of claims.

 

I cant remember who posted this one.

"As to your other query, I retired from practice several years ago, so

I have not kept pace with court procedure, but if the CPR have not

changed on this point the position is that discontinuance is not a

determination on the merits and therefore does not preclude a fresh

claim, but if an action is discontinued after service of a defence

then the claimant requires the permission of the court to bring a fresh action."

This by andyorch

 

CPR 38.7

 

A claimant who discontinues a claim needs the permission of the court to make another claim against the same defendant if-

(a) he discontinued the claim after the defendant filed a defence; and

(b) the other claim arises out of facts which are the same or substantially the same as those relating to the discontinued claim.

 

 

If following discontinuance fresh proceedings are commenced either with or without permission of the court the discontinuance is not of itself a defence to the fresh claim. It is suggested that the permission to commence fresh proceedings will not be easily given since in any event the new claim could be struck out as an abuse of the court’s process under CPR 3.4 (see para CPR 3.4). The court is likely to attach conditions to any permission given under this Rule such as an initial requirement that the costs for which the applicant is liable upon the discontinued proceedings are paid beforehand and that the claimant otherwise makes a payment into court.

 

I trust the above is of help

 

Regards

 

Andy

This one by surfaceagentx20

Here's my take on the situation.

 

The poor critters evidently have yet to hear about something called res judicata, which encompasses issue estoppel, cause of action estoppel and merger. I'll explain all this in a minute.

 

In any case, by an order of the court, a claim between the same parties over subject matter which I understand is similar or identical to the subject matter of the recently issued proceedings, was struck out by order of the court. That order was evidently, not appealed and therfore remains the order of the court in relation to the issue.

 

The basis of the doctrine as it applies to issue or cause of action estoppel involves the policy which favours the benefit of finality, the sanctity of decisions of the court and the avoidance of the risk that courts may issue contradictory decisions. It was neatly set out in the speech of Lord Goff in Republic of India v India Steamship Co Limited [1993] where he said:

 

“…the cause of action, having become merged in the judgement, ceases to exist, as it is expressed in the Latin maxim transit in rem judicatem…”

 

Here lies the distinction between the availability of a second action where the Claimant falls on his sword by discontinuing his claim (and where the claimant wishing to bring a second action satsfies certain conditions) and an order for strike out. The former will involve no judicial decision on the merits whereas the latter often will. I'll deal with the situation where it doesn't shortly. Evidently, the Judge who struck out the first claim decided either there was no merit in the claim, or prospect of success or possibly, that owing to contumelious disobedience of one or more orders of the court, the claimant was undeserving of having the claim progress to trial.

 

It will be necessary to be satisfied that the first and second claims represent litigation over the same subject matter and for the purpose it will be necessary to see the Particulars of Claim of both first and second proceedings. Assuming the second claim mirrors the first, the proper thing to do is to submit a Defence pleading all that may be available by way of defence (there may be an issue over the default notice I gather) plus a plea of res judicata and that the cause of action now relied upon merged with the order striking out the claim which was not appealed and remains the decision of the court on the set of facts forming the second claim.

 

Having served the defence I would then be inclined to make an application under CPR 24 for summary judgment on the basis the Claimant has no reasonable prospect of success owing to issue and cause of action estoppel etc.

 

As fpr any contention from the Claimant that the decision to strike out did not involve a decision on the merits, I would maintain the court has the power to strike out the second action as an abuse of process under CPR 3.4 (mentioned in CPR 24) where unmeritorious proceedings are begun such as this second action. The basis underlying the abuse is that if for example, the first case was dismissed for failure to produce documents in obedience to an order of the court (implying the possibility the decision was not based upon the existence of merit in the claim itself) and the Claimant is now in possession of those documents which it would wish to employ in the second claim, so called 'extended' res judicata principles will apply in the sense that with due dilligence, the claimants would not have begun the first proceedings without first having possession of those documents and with due dilligence, the first set of proceedings were sufficiently available for the Claimant to litigate the issues.

Hope this helps

[citizenB]

One of the site team, supersnoops) has suggested the following might be of use to you.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/show-post/post-2302013.html

[citizenB]

That is my understanding, Clynite.

 

Thanks for the rep:D

[citizenB]

Thanks for your pm. Will just have a look back over your thread to see what is what.

[citizenB]

Hello GhostDebt,

I have read previous threads related to theAO/N150 and have found the AQ /N150 a little confusing because, I am not disputing Restons/ HFC claim. As far as I am concerned the case has already been dealt with and was Struck Out 10/01/2006. Restons are implying this is a new claim.I want to inform the Court that the impending proceedings are an abuse of Court process as, the matter has already been dealt with. But it appears that the track is determined by the amount being claimed. That being the case, I will be forced to follow the fast track. I do not have the funds to pay the Court Fees and hope my circumstances will offer exemption. That being said, I intend to complete the N150 in the following manner - please correct me if I am wrong.

 

Settlement

I cant settle before hearing as Restons are hell bent on pursuing this previously struck out case. So, I intend to answer 'NO' and possibly cite the aforementioned reasons in the 'Reason' box.

 

Location of Trial

I intend to answer 'Yes' - because previous case heard at this court.

 

Pre-action Protocols

I intend to answer 'No' Reason - Restons actions prevent this

 

Case Management

This is where I am confused- amount of claim in dispute.

I dont believe there is an amount to dispute as case has already been dealt with. But, Restons state £6863.17 as of 18/01/2008, HFC say £7355.84 as of 01/10/2008. In any case, this means I should follow the Fast Track.

I intend inserting N/A in amount box, Applications 'No' and Witnesses me the defendant.

 

Experts

I intend marking all boxes 'No'.

 

Track

I am inclined to choose 'Small claims track'. Reasons being, the case is straight forward and is an abuse of Court Process by the Claimant, and can be resolved very quickly.

 

Trail or Final Hearing

Time estimate - '30 minutes'

Days when unable to attend Court - 'No'

 

Proposed Directions

Im unsure what I can attach, but for now I think answer 'No'.

 

Costs

I intend inserting N/A.

 

Fee

I intend to select'No'

 

Other Information

Have you attached documents to this questionnaire? - 'Yes'

Have you sent these documents to the other party?-'Yes'

When did they receive them? - 'N/K'

Do you intend to make any applications in the immediate future? - 'Yes' possibly a 'Strike Out' application. Hopefully someone can advise.

In the additional information box, I thought I could cite the previous case details and my belief that this is an abuse of Court Process and hopefully this would assist the Judge with the management of this claim. Could I request that the case be considered for a 'Strike Out' in this section or will I have to apply via a N244 form. Or would it be necessary. Is it possible the Judge could reolve this issue at this assessment stage, given the facts of the previous case?

 

Sorry for the long post, but its the only way I can express my intentions. Would anyone able to offer direction or remedial help, please advise. In anticipation, many thanks Peter.

 

Do you have all the paperwork from the original trial and also the final order from the court where the case was struck out ?

 

Apart from the figures involved, what difference is there between the two POCs.

 

Will this be heard in the same court as previously ?

 

I will see if I can attract some attention from the site team for you.

[citizenB]

Ok, thanks for that information. I will have a look round and see what information I can find out.. will try and get something posted up tomorrow for you.

[citizenB]

Peter, this is a reply from one of the site team. I will try and find out more re the procedures mentioned. When do you need to file this AQ.. 24th October ??

 

It would be useful if you can answer the questions I have highlighted in red below.

 

Re-instated claim?

 

Have they had permission to reinstate?

 

Was the claim struck out under CPR 3.4? If it was, Restons need relief from sanctions under CPR 3.9 before bringing another claim.

 

I would be making an application to strike this claim out on the basis that Restons have been struck out previously and are bringing a claim on the same basis, without the permission of the Court. In fact, I'd include in that application a request for an Extended Civil Restraint order, to prevent Reston's bringing more claims after this one. (CPR PD 3.1)

[citizenB]

That is bizarre, the claim was struck out in 2006.. not stayed ??

 

I will ask the site team member who gave me that information what we can do now.

 

We have a couple of days in hand.. so hang in there:D

[citizenB]

Hello GhostDebt,

I have read previous threads related to theAO/N150 and have found the AQ /N150 a little confusing because, I am not disputing Restons/ HFC claim. As far as I am concerned the case has already been dealt with and was Struck Out 10/01/2006. Restons are implying this is a new claim.I want to inform the Court that the impending proceedings are an abuse of Court process as, the matter has already been dealt with. But it appears that the track is determined by the amount being claimed. That being the case, I will be forced to follow the fast track. I do not have the funds to pay the Court Fees and hope my circumstances will offer exemption. That being said, I intend to complete the N150 in the following manner - please correct me if I am wrong.

 

Settlement

I cant settle before hearing as Restons are hell bent on pursuing this previously struck out case. So, I intend to answer 'NO' and possibly cite the aforementioned reasons in the 'Reason' box. Agree with this. As far as you can see, Restons have had no permission to start this case again. It was struck out (date) so there is really nothing to settle

 

Location of Trial

I intend to answer 'Yes' - because previous case heard at this court. Yes, it is probably good news it is being held in the same court

 

Pre-action Protocols

I intend to answer 'No' Reason - Restons actions prevent this

 

Case Management

This is where I am confused- amount of claim in dispute.

I dont believe there is an amount to dispute as case has already been dealt with. But, Restons state £6863.17 as of 18/01/2008, HFC say £7355.84 as of 01/10/2008. In any case, this means I should follow the Fast Track. I think this is all you can say. Again, unless Restons have permission to bring this again.. it was settled in 2005/2006. There is nothing to manage ?

 

I intend inserting N/A in amount box, Applications 'No' and Witnesses me the defendant. Correct

 

Experts

I intend marking all boxes 'No'. Correct

 

Track

I am inclined to choose 'Small claims track'. Reasons being, the case is straight forward and is an abuse of Court Process by the Claimant, and can be resolved very quickly. Yes, try and get it on the Small claims track if possible

 

Trail or Final Hearing

Time estimate - '30 minutes' Should be able to deal with this in 30 minutes

Days when unable to attend Court - 'No'

 

Proposed Directions

Im unsure what I can attach, but for now I think answer 'No'.

 

Costs

I intend inserting N/A.

 

Fee

I intend to select'No' The fee should be paid by Restons, not you

 

Other Information

Have you attached documents to this questionnaire? - 'Yes'

 

Have you sent these documents to the other party?-'Yes'

 

When did they receive them? - 'N/K'

 

Do you intend to make any applications in the immediate future? - 'Yes' possibly a 'Strike Out' application. Hopefully someone can advise.

 

In the additional information box, I thought I could cite the previous case details and my belief that this is an abuse of Court Process and hopefully this would assist the Judge with the management of this claim. Could I request that the case be considered for a 'Strike Out' in this section or will I have to apply via a N244 form. Or would it be necessary. Is it possible the Judge could reolve this issue at this assessment stage, given the facts of the previous case?

 

Sorry for the long post, but its the only way I can express my intentions. Would anyone able to offer direction or remedial help, please advise. In anticipation, many thanks Peter.

 

Hi Peter, well it would seem there is a bit of a muddle here. As you can see from the comment below.

 

It's up to the OP, really? I can't see how they can complete an AQ at this stage. If I were them, I'd be seeking a SO on the basis the original SO was done, presumably under CPR 3.4/CPR PD 3.1, and that it's unjust to hear this case again. On the other hand, there may be ground to be had by waiting for it to reach the local court then calling the Court Manager.

 

I think you need to photocopy the original claim and strike out orders and attach them to this. Has this been allocated to your local court or are you returning it to Northampton ?. I am wondering if a letter explaining what has happened to the Court Manager might be a good idea.

[citizenB]

Right, thanks for this information, Peter. I will ask car2403 if he can offer any further help on this.

 

It is quite clear to me though that representation needed to be made in 2006. Therefore something seems to have gone very wrong .

[citizenB]

Hello citizenB,

Just thought a little more detail may help your assessment of the facts.

 

Im a bit jumbled to say the least, but it could be important.

The original judgement was entered in my absence ie I was away from the matrimonial home and never received the original Court papers. Restons then forged ahead and harassesd my wife and family.

 

They obtained a charge order on my home, for an alleged unsecured loan - this is what this whole affair relates too. When I eventually got to discuss the case in court, the case was well and truly underway. I convinced the Judge that I should have the opportunity to defend myself and offer evidence in mitigation of Restons claims etc.

 

As things progressed, I quickly gathered that the judge was none to happy with the way Restons were behaving, and at a particular point in the proceedings, he agreed to let me serve a defence.I had to submit my defence by July 2005.This was completed as required by the courts instructions.

 

My defence was to be served on Restons. Also, the claimant/Restons shall within 14 days file and serve a response thereto, if so desired.The next hearing was in August 2005.

 

 

During August's hearing, Restons/claimant were ordered to file and serve a response to my defence by September 2005, next hearing was as described in previous post, on 5 Oct 2005.

 

It was this hearing that Restons failed to turn up at or react to my defence, and the Judge made his Judgement/ Order for set aside/stay and the following stike out. I gather the Judge gave Restons every opportnity to appear and continue with their claim, but they declined.

 

All that said, It is why I asked the original question that started this thread. Can they make a new claim after original has been struck out?

Thanks for hanging in there with me, catch up with you tomorrow.

Thanks Peter

 

 

Hi Peter, thanks for the extra information. I think the main question here is.. have they applied to the court to bring this new claim if it is based on the same facts as previously. IMHO, the facts have not changed in anyway.

 

Anyway, here is a suggestion.

 

 

I think he should fax - do not write - to Restons to tell them that he intends to apply to the local court to strike this latest application out and stay the claim, plus apply for a civil restraint order, because of their behaviour.

 

Mark that without prejudice, save as to costs. (Most important) Give them 3 days to seek instructions from their client and invite them to confirm, by fax/email back - don't wait for post - that they will withdraw their application to reinstate on a permanent basis.

 

If they don't, we'll have to pull an application for all that together, but I think threats of turning Restons costs on themselves should be enough to turn them off continuing. If it doesn't, then the game is on.

 

It will take these 3 days for the flaming Court to receive the transfer of files, etc, as well, but there's nothing we can do in that timeframe, so time to stick the boot in to Reston's.

 

 

If you go with the above advice, then this still gives you plenty of time to submit the AQ as well.

[citizenB]

Hi Peter,

 

Dont panic. A directions hearing is pretty standard procedure.

 

This is a post from supasnooper from another thread

 

It will be a hearing where the Judge will specify to both parties what documents must be submitted, and to who, and when by.

 

It is done to make sure that the full facts are available to everyone so there are no delays in the progression of the case.

 

I would advise that you attend this hearing, as the Judge will ask you what documentation you require disclosing from the claimant for your defence.

 

 

Some more information I found

 

A directions hearing is one in which the Court will set directions for

how your case will proceed. So, for example, it will say when the

parties should give disclosure of documents; when witness statements

will be prepared; whether any expert witnesses are needed. They may

also give you a rough idea of when the final hearing will take place.

That sort of thing.

It is unusual for anything to be decided in relation to the case itself

(i.e. who will win/lose).

the aim is to give directions to ensure that the case is ready for trial. Depending on when the proceedings were issued, the directions might relate to exchange of witness statements, documents and expert reports or to setting a date for trial and ascertaining what dates there are to avoid.

Just in case, you should be ready to answer questions about your case.. so make sure you are comfortable with your presentation and the contents.

 

I would say take a copy of your defence and witness statement with you, just to be on the safe side.. perhaps also a rough draft of a skeleton argument so you have something to refer to if you are asked questions.

I will bring this to the attention of others to put your mind at rest. [/font]

 

I wonder if it might be a good idea to take that letter that Restons sent to the court saying YOU had asked for a stay.. Others I am sure will confirm what, if any thing you need to take.

Edited October 28, 2009 by citizenB
removed annoying font commands

[citizenB]

sorry supasnooper

[citizenB]

Woohoo, well done clynite.

 

IMHO, It looks as though you had a fair judge and he is giving you an opportunity to forward a more structured version. Basically making sure all the i's are dotted and the t's crossed.

 

I will try and round up some people with more knowledge than myself and can help you put your case together.

 

Firstly we need to get your amended defence together and I am wondering if you need to complete an N244 for the application to strike out. I will ask for you. I am not certain just how much time you have .. did the Judge say that you had 14 days to submit your amended defence and then Restons to file a statement in response.. or this all has to be done within 14 days ?? I think it more likely the first.

 

The judge said to me ' I would like you to submit an amended defence and I suggest you make an application for a strike out order as an abuse of court process.'and that Restons file a statement in response within the next 14 days.

[citizenB]

Peter, I have been looking for res judicata on the forums and come up with this defence on another thread.

 

Point 2 in particular appears to be of some interest I would think. At the same time, I am trying to track down the person that helped speedloan.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/show-post/post-2530933.html

 

 

 

I, xxxx, am a Litigant in Person & make application for a strike out of this application for reinstatement of this claim for the following reasons:

 

1. The claimant, xxxx, issued a summons in the xxxx County Court on xxxx. The defendant issued his defence & completed his AQ on xxx. The claimant was ordered to submit a fee by 23 July 2009 if he wished to continue with the claim. The claimant failed to comply & the court permitted him a further 7 days in which to comply. The claimant was notified of this on 24 July 2009. Again the claimant failed to comply & the case was ‘struck out’ on xxxx. That order was evidently, not appealed within the time limits set by the court and therefore remains the order of the court in relation to the issue.

 

2. Since the claim is for the same amount as before and the earlier proceedings were dealt with by a Court then the doctrine of estoppal known as res judicata applies and this action should be deemed an abuse of Court process as that described by Sir James Wigram V.-C. in Henderson v Henderson (1843) 3 Hare 100 at 114: "In trying this question I believe I state the rule of the Court correctly when I say that, where a given matter becomes the subject of litigation in, and of adjudication by, a court of competent jurisdiction, the Court requires the parties to that litigation to bring forward their whole case, and will not (except under special circumstances) permit the same parties to open the same subject of litigation in respect of matter which might have been brought forward as part of the subject in contest, but which was not brought forward, only because they have, from negligence, inadvertence, or even accident, omitted part of their case. The plea of res judicata applies, except in special cases, not only to points upon which the Court was actually required by the parties to form an opinion and pronounce a judgment, but to every point which properly belonged to the subject of litigation, and which the parties, exercising reasonable diligence, might have brought forward at the time."

 

3. I sent a request under CPR31.14 to the claimant on xxxx for information necessary for me to formulate a defence. This included copies of the default notice & proof of mailing plus statements of account to enable me to assess the accuracy of the claim. To date I have not received this information.

 

4. It is necessary under S87 of Consumer Credit Act 1974 to serve a default notice before terminating an account & commencing legal action. I have not received a default notice & therefore put the claimant to strict proof of mailing of such. He has failed to supply me with this evidence.

 

5. Furthermore failure of a default notice to be accurate not only invalidates the default notice (Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain & Co NLD 14 July 1998) but is an unlawful rescission of contract which would not only prevent the Court enforcing any alleged debt, but give the Defendant a counter claim for damages. (Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society [1996] 4 All ER 119). The claimant has not provided a detailed statement of account & it is therefore impossible to ascertain the accuracy of the default notice.

 

6. The claimant has been given the opportunity to assess the validity of my defence & has been offered two opportunities to progress with the claim. He did not take those opportunities & he has not fulfilled my CPR31.14 request. I therefore request that court considers the full implications of CPR3.9 & an abuse of process under CPR3.4. The claimant has no reasonable prospect of success & I request that the court denies the claimant permission to reinstate this claim.

 

 

7. Alternatively, if the court grants the claimant’s application for reinstatement of claim, I request the court to issue directions for the appropriate information to be provided by the claimant to enable me to compile a defence. Without production of the requested documents the case cannot be dealt with justly and fairly, and would severely prejudice my rights to a fair trial as laid out under Article 6 of the Convention rights contained within the Human Rights Act 1998. (draft directions attached)

 

[citizenB]

To download a copy of the N244, click on the blue link.

[citizenB]

Thanks for looking in FG and explaining the res judicata part more clearly.

 

Peter, so what we are now waiting on is the order from the court, yes ? Perhaps you can put together a draft so you can be ready to leap into action once it arrives through the letter box:)

 

It seems to me as though everything is falling into place now.

[citizenB]

Briliant, FG.

 

Peter, all I have to offer is where you have made reference to the claimant as "HE".. you should change that to either they or the Claimant

Well done.

[citizenB]

At last! The Court docs have arrived. Because I live in a rural area, the post arrives pm instead of am. Anyway, I will quote the DJ's order verbatim:

 

It is ordered that

 

1. Leave granted to the Defendant to amend his defence by 4pm on 18 November 2009.

 

This is almost complete isnt it ?

 

2. Leave granted to the Defendant to apply by 4pm on 18 November 2009, for an order that the case shall be struck out as an abuse of process.

 

Yep, we can sort this out as well. Might need some input from others, will alert those that can help for you.

 

3.Leave granted to the Claimant to file in Court their statement in reply within 14 days of receipt of the Defendants statement.

 

4. Application of the Defendants be listed for a hearing on the 7 January 2010 at 15.00 with a time estimate of 1 hour.

 

Need to dot the I's and cross the T's. If I understand correctly, the support and advice to date would imply, that I submit the draft 'amended defence', as previously posted, before or on next Wednesday. Also, a completed Form N244. ( checked with Court - I have to pay a fee of £75 ) Can anyone help with the N244? Most of the form is straight forward, other than the following:

 

Part A (2) - " intend to apply for an order ( a draft of which is attached ) that"

Do I put in here 'Strike out'?

 

Part A (3) - "because"

Can I put 'please see attached amended defence'? - Yes

 

Part B - I (we) wish to rely on: tick one box

a-The attached ( witness statement)(affidavit)

b-My statement of case

c-Evidence in Part C in support of my application

Should I choose a/b or c ?

 

Not sure whether it should be a or b will check

 

Part C - I (We) wish to rely on the following evidence in support of this application:

Can I put 'please see attached amended defence'? I think so. You will also need to include copies of any documents you will be relying on, if any.

 

Some other points I'm not clear about are:

Do I submit my amended defence, with a copy, so the court can issue this to the Claimant, or do I send a copy to the Claimant?

 

On the N244 there is a box which asks who is to be served with the application you tick "Claimant" You should include 3 complete copies of the N244 and the Defence. One copy will be stamped and sent back to you, one copy will be sent to the Claimant and one copy will be kept by the court. If there is a lot of paperwork then file it neatly and chronologically in a folder.

 

A Hearing has been arranged for 7 January 2010. Will this be the final Hearing, and is it normal to set aside 1 hour for this?

 

Usually between 1 - 2 hours. If the Judge grants your application then yes, it should be the end of it all.

 

Other members have suggested I apply for costs. Can anyone explain how I do this? Is this request put on the N244 at the same time as the 'Strike out' request? Also, If I did win costs, how would they be paid to me? Given my experience of the Claimant solicitor, I cant imagine them sending me a cheque for an agreed sum. I honestly dont understand the costs situation. Any explanation would be appreciated.

 

You will be including a "Draft Order" one item will be that the Claimant do pay the Claimants costs of the claim in the sum of £ XXX.XX within 14 days. Will sort that out a bit later. You will need to work out how much it has cost you to apply for this Strike out, including the fee to submit the application. So keep a note of the time it has taken you to prepare your statement of case/defence. Also the time taken to research any law/ regulations, etc. Plus printing costs, paper. Travel to court to for filing and as you have an estimated time for the hearing you can also include the hour for that, your time to get there and back.

All your time should be billed at £9.25 hour which is the standard Litigant in Person charge. I am sure others will be able to think of other things you need to include if I have missed anything

 

I would be most greatful for any advice or help on the above points.

Yours in anticipation.

 

Hope the above is of some help, meanwhile I will try and find some more knowledgeable help in getting this strike out application sorted for you.

[citizenB]

I am just finding information that will help with the application to strike out.

 

I think that CPR 3.4(2) (b) applies in this instance

 

PART 3 - THE COURT’S CASE MANAGEMENT POWERS - Ministry of Justice

 

The court may strike out a statement of case if it appears to the court-

 

(a) that the statement of case discloses no reasonable grounds for bringing or defending the claim;

(b) that the statement of case is an abuse of the court’s process or is otherwise likely to obstruct the just disposal of the proceedings; or

© that there has been a failure to comply with a rule, practice direction or court order.

 

 

Practice direction 1.5

 

PRACTICE DIRECTION – STRIKING OUT A STATEMENT OF CASE - Ministry of Justice

 

The following article is an interesting read in respect of "abuse of process"

 

Strike out for abuse of process: guidance for making and resisting applications | The Law Gazette

 

 

 

[citizenB]

Just one thought, for the N244 application to strike out.. is Clynite the claimant or the defendant.

[citizenB]

Peter, Yes, the costs you put on the Draft order are basically a good estimate.

 

As regards your WS. Copy your WS into a separate document and expand on it. Put everything in date order from when it happened. Post up your draft later on and we can have a look and tidy it up for you.

 

Your case is fairly unique and all WS are different in any case, so "templates" are not in abundance.

 

HTH

[citizenB]

Clynite, I am sure you wont go wrong with FG's excellent suggestions.

 

[citizenB]

Hmmm, I think we expected something like this didnt we. I will alert FG, supasnooper and others who have been helping with this.