Trial Bundle - Adhock attachments and bundles sent over a month late by Defendant

[yellowplum]

I just wanted to get an understanding if anything could be done about this....

 

I have a claim that I raised in dispute against a large company in Jan 2011. This went back and forth for exchange of letters on liability for a while. In the end they told me to jog on...so I issued a claim against them. It was defended and is set to go to court in December.

 

This claim is for around £300

 

Two things happened, I had a telephone allocation hearing at which point the judge slightly chastised the solicitor for not engaging in mediation or trying to resolve the issue.

 

Secondly the Defendant wanted an entire day to hear the claim, judge wasn't best pleased and gave him 90 mins, and stated that the hearing is only to determine whether or not the item in question met the legal requirement (not all the other issues that are being clouded by the Defendant).

 

An order come through around 10 days later and within that order both sides had to file and serve all documents they wanted to rely on at the hearing, this was set at end of October.

 

Subsequently today I received another document from the Defendant simply saying:

 

Please find enclosed supplementary bundle documents which the Defendant intends to rely on at the hearing.

 

Is this allowed? I don't really want them to be sending documents left right and centre, even though the court set a date.

[andydd]

As its £300 it is no doubt on the small track ? There are jno hard and fast rules about documentation or trail bundles and its generally acceptable to send docs in an ad-hoc fashion. Although the main docs like particulars of claim can only be changed with the courts permission.

 

But it would appear that they have sent docs after the deadline, it is possible to ask that these extra docs be struck out or disallowed although not sure if its worth the effort in doing so but the relevant law is CPR 3.4 2 © - http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part03#IDAMLWKC "There has been a failure to comply with a court order or direction", the court could in theory strike out everything or just the stuff sent after the October deadline.

 

This is different in fast/multi track where there are stricter rules on producing a single bundle agreed by both parties, LVT's and no doubt other tribunals fall somewhere inbetween small and fast track in that they require a single bundle but there are no real sanctions for failing to comply.

 

CPR 39 deals with the quite strict way in which fast/multi track bundles should be compiled. the PD is here > http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/pd_part39a#IDAMLWKC

[yellowplum]

As its £300 it is no doubt on the small track ? There are jno hard and fast rules about documentation or trail bundles and its generally acceptable to send docs in an ad-hoc fashion. Although the main docs like particulars of claim can only be changed with the courts permission. But it would appear that they have sent docs after the deadline, it is possible to ask that these extra docs be struck out or disallowed although not sure if its worth the effort in doing so.

 

This is different in fast/multi track where there are stricter rules on producing a single bundle agreed by both parties, LVT's and no doubt other tribunals fall somewhere inbetween small and fast track in that they require a single bundle but there are no real sanctions for failing to comply.

 

CPR 39 deals with the quite strict way in which fast/multi track bundles should be compiled. the PD is here > http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/pd_part39a#IDAMLWKC

 

The judge's directions on the small track where rather explicit (which is rather unusual).

[andydd]

Ive updated/edited my post so you may wish to re-read.

[andydd]

I had a summary judgment case where the other sides solicitor didnt comply with deadlines (in this case the standard 7 day one) and I bought this up, this effectively meant he had no evidence/docs so he was somewhat weakened, he asked for adjournment which I disagreed with and I won the case . Although I have no doubt I would of won even if he had submitted docs on time.

 

Andy