Solicitor/negligence claim:

[callum1999]

No-ones ranting, not producing but producing a statement which has now been used to secure a judgement claiming funding was initially in place, when it was not in order to (a) legally represent (b) to validate a legitimate contract, is contempt of court, if that was not entirely true.

 

As for giving you on the demands of "here and now" as to prove, lol, brilliant.

 

As for rational and legal argument, please do tell how a solicitor, could possibly legally represent a client without the funding to initiate such agreement, give me the answers, as you seem to have an answer for everything, but what is relevent, you go missing under that rock, any thoughts, or can we expect the same diverted dribble that follows the smashing the hell out of that poor keyboard of yours.

 

You are all ifs, buts and maybe's, without substance, fact..

[callum1999]

you actually entered them as an exhibit?. You haven't mentioned that before.

How did you request that, and when??.

 

I've previously suggested you post up the witness statements (you haven't yet!), together with the dates they were both filed AND served........

 

So if the Claimant entered this as an exhibit on which to oppose his claim being struck out, and the judge says he is not interested in that evidence, even though that evidence comes from a previous solicitor/barrister representing the Claimant, that would show grounds for claim; is the (a) an unlawful act (b) abuse of power © abuse of equality in law (d) an abuse of court process.

 

A yes or no to a,b,c or d would suffice the question, thanks in advance

[BazzaS]

No-ones ranting, not producing but producing a statement which has now been used to secure a judgement claiming funding was initially in place, when it was not in order to (a) legally represent (b) to validate a legitimate contract, is contempt of court, if that was not entirely true.

 

As for giving you on the demands of "here and now" as to prove, lol, brilliant.

 

As for rational and legal argument, please do tell how a solicitor, could possibly legally represent a client without the funding to initiate such agreement, give me the answers, as you seem to have an answer for everything, but what is relevent, you go missing under that rock, any thoughts, or can we expect the same diverted dribble that follows the smashing the hell out of that poor keyboard of yours.

 

You are all ifs, buts and maybe's, without substance, fact..

 

So, you still aren't going to reply as to if you have appealed, might appeal, think you have grounds for appeal (and if so, can state them clearly!).

 

This from someone who can produce such as "not producing but producing a statement which has now been used to secure a judgement claiming funding was initially in place, when it was not in order to (a) legally represent (b) to validate a legitimate contract, is contempt of court, if that was not entirely true."

 

"not producing but producing a statement " : are you confused?? Are they producing it or not, you seem unable to make up your mind!

 

Mind you, regardless, it isn't contempt of court to not produce a document if the court hasn't asked them to : your claim was struck out before disclosure.

Did they make any reference to a contract?. They wouldn't have been obliged to based in the absence of the issue of a contract in your dismally drafted PofC (that got struck out as a result).

This is why you've been repeatedly told the contract isn't an issue while it is absent from your PofC ....

 

You keep returning to irrelevancies ; the contract, and your notice to admit facts. They don't seem to be irrelevant to you, but returning to them when advised otherwise seems to be going so well for you .....

claim struck out & £9k costs.

 

If you think I'm without substance : you are the one

a) with no claim (it has been struck out),

b) no plan that you can substantiate (or that withstands scrutiny) : else you'd be able to post it up

c) inability to post the relevant witness statements and applications, and

d) who expects to have their appeal created for them without giving the information required.

 

You haven't really moved on from 18th August.....

And on what grounds?

You tell us.

You were the one who wanted to appeal.

 

As for "all ifs, buts and maybe's" : since you haven't provided information that allows a more definitive response that isn't a surprise.

If people are more precise they'll be castigated by you for being wrong. If they are less precise they get criticised for not being more definitive.

It is never you that is wrong, is it?

 

Yet, you are the source of your woes. If you ever had a claim you lost the opportunity to succeed when you decided you knew better than all the advice here ...... (And the solicitor who would have taken your case under a CFA too, you knew better than them as well.....)

 

An odd definition of "success" and "winning" you have.

[BazzaS]

So if the Claimant entered this as an exhibit on which to oppose his claim being struck out, and the judge says he is not interested in that evidence, even though that evidence comes from a previous solicitor/barrister representing the Claimant, that would show grounds for claim; is the (a) an unlawful act (b) abuse of power © abuse of equality in law (d) an abuse of court process.

 

A yes or no to a,b,c or d would suffice the question, thanks in advance

 

Unable to give a reliable answer. Not because I like to not commit, but due to lack of information to base a reliable answer on.

I haven't seen the witness statement they were referred to in (all of a sudden after they were absent from the one you posted there was more than one!), nor the details of how they were "exhibited", and you've already shown your understanding of procedure to be lacking.

 

So, it'd be at best a guess without the information you haven't provided, but I'm suspecting

e) None of a) to d), but instead "Callum got it wrong, again".

 

Why so shy with the details?

2 1/2 months in, and we've not even seen most of the defence, nor which of it you think you can prove was fabricated .....

[callum1999]

Unable to give a reliable answer. Not because I like to not commit, but due to lack of information to base a reliable answer on.

I haven't seen the witness statement they were referred to in (all of a sudden after they were absent from the one you posted there was more than one!), nor the details of how they were "exhibited", and you've already shown your understanding of procedure to be lacking.

 

So, it'd be at best a guess without the information you haven't provided, but I'm suspecting

e) None of a) to d), but instead "Callum got it wrong, again".

 

Why so shy with the details?

2 1/2 months in, and we've not even seen most of the defence, nor which of it you think you can prove was fabricated .....

 

lol, your knuckles and that poor keyboard of yours, must be tired.

 

Just to refresh your memory [removed], stop banging on about any defence, fabrication and telling porkies to the Court and a judge, (cougth) can happen and in this case, has happened after any sub-standard defence has been produced.

 

You seem to be obsessed with the other-side defence, that's all it was, a denial, which a bigger Court and a more respectect judge will see straight through.

 

Let us know when you can re-write the history of the contract and its law without the basic's being in place, funding, thoughts>>>

Edited August 29, 2016 by honeybee13
Inappropriate word removed.

[BazzaS]

a bigger Court and a more respectect judge will see straight through.

 

same old, same old.

So the same answer as last time.

I have to agree with BazzaS.

 

Callum, would you mind telling us please how you think you can get this back to a proper court please?

 

While you can't actually give a straight answer to this, backed up with detail.

Will we be treated to the "it's a crime, the criminal courts will enact my revenge!" fantasy?

Or the "I'm Perry Mason reborn, it'll all come good if only I can get a

Circuit Judge / Master / High Court Judge / the Master of the Rolls" (delete as applicable) "to review it!" delusion.

 

You remain long on rhetoric, short on reality and ability.

 

"Bigger Court" : are you going to nip round with a tape measure and check it is acceptably sized?.

[honeybee13]

With the best will in the world, we seem to be going round in circles here.

 

Callum, from memory, your appeal needs to be in at the end of this week. Do you still need help with writing it please? If not, this thread may have run its course.

 

HB

[callum1999]

With the best will in the world, we seem to be going round in circles here.

 

Callum, from memory, your appeal needs to be in at the end of this week. Do you still need help with writing it please? If not, this thread may have run its course.

 

HB

 

Hi HB

 

I am going to ask a number of question, and i would be obliged if proven, the grounds of appeal could be viable.

 

I would appreciate help from anyone, but not from BazzaS, who i would like to thank for his input, even though most of it has not been positive nor constructive, but he or she has the right to an opinion, but i do not think he can now add much to this thread.

 

My first question is this, Why did the Master and on considering both proposals for directions decide an agree with the other parties proposed directions.

 

Should a reason or reasons been giving to accept one parties proposals but not the other parties proposals.

 

Those directions that the Master relied upon, effectively move the case from the High Court to County Court.

 

Should matters have stayed where proceedings were issued, or was the other-side proposal to move based on both parties coming from the same City, a viable reason to transfer?

[BazzaS]

Hi HB

 

I am going to ask a number of question, and i would be obliged if proven, the grounds of appeal could be viable.

 

I would appreciate help from anyone, but not from BazzaS, who i would like to thank for his input, even though most of it has not been positive nor constructive, but he or she has the right to an opinion, but i do not think he can now add much to this thread.

 

My first question is this, Why did the Master and on considering both proposals for directions decide an agree with the other parties proposed directions.

 

Should a reason or reasons been giving to accept one parties proposals but not the other parties proposals.

 

Those directions that the Master relied upon, effectively move the case from the High Court to County Court.

 

Should matters have stayed where proceedings were issued, or was the other-side proposal to move based on both parties coming from the same City, a viable reason to transfer?

 

You don't get to choose who answers, provided the poster (and answers) comply with site rules.

If my answers are wrong, I'm sure there are plenty of potential contributors who can point it out (together with why ..... that would be discussion, as opposed to your mere [and baseless!] contradiction).

 

" Why did the Master and on considering both proposals for directions decide an agree with the other parties proposed directions."?

Previously answered: you didn't actually ask for the High Court clearly or effectively. You asked for "multi-track", which could be the County Court, and where you thought you were asking for the High Court, you were actually saying "it is too late for the Defendant to refute the jurisdiction of the courts of England & Wales". Based on your PofC and proposed directions alone, the High Court would likely have sent it to the County Court, without input from the D. If the D proposed the County Court too: foregone conclusion.

You could have (promptly!) appealed the choice of venue, but haven't mentioned doing so. Perhaps you were too busy arguing the toss here?.

 

"Should a reason or reasons been giving to accept one parties proposals but not the other parties proposals."? No, especially as the decision does not appear unreasonable or irrational, and you had the right to appeal.

Mind you, at least you have moved forward : as you now seem to accept that your view may have been considered and just not accepted, rather than your previous claim of being "ignored".

 

"Should matters have stayed where proceedings were issued, or was the other-side proposal to move based on both parties coming from the same City, a viable reason to transfer?"

Previously answered.

a) we don't know what D's proposed directions were, as you haven't posted them, (despite multiple requests), to enable people to see them to pass comment on them,

b) location of the parties (and thus travel costs) is one potential factor, but you can't assume it is the ONLY factor the Master used to decide the court managing the case,

c) a case for the sum claimed could have been heard in either venue,

d) all else being equal, if the case load at your local county court was less than that at the High Court, that could have been a factor in choice of venue,

e) other than you THINKING you were asking for the High Court, and having issued the case at the High Court, you haven't given

i) any reason on CAG why it should have been in the High Court, and (more importantly)

ii) any reason to the Court (as far as you have posted, anyhow) why the Court shouldn't have moved it.

 

So, no grounds of appeal based on choice of venue.

 

All questions that you have previously asked, and all previously answered.

Asking the same questions again and again without providing any new information : you'll just get the same answers, even if they aren't the answers you are hoping for!.

[honeybee13]

With the best will in the world, we seem to be going round in circles here.

 

Callum, from memory, your appeal needs to be in at the end of this week. Do you still need help with writing it please? If not, this thread may have run its course.

 

HB

 

So is that yes, you would still like help with your appeal please?

 

If you don't want a particular person's advice, then you need to put them on your Ignore list. However, you only have a couple of people helping so not wanting to hear from one of them may not be too productive.

 

HB

[callum1999]

Here is the probable reason why the Master agreed to the other-sides proposals, hence why the case was moved

 

The other-side gave a misrepresentation to Master ? that the Claimant had declined any proposed directions pursuant to the Order made on the 25th May 2016, made by Master ?, on the 23rd June 2016..

 

On the 16th June 2016 the Claimant and before the misrepresentation made to the Master attempted to agree with the other-side, the directions which would have included the venue.

 

The other-side said that they would take instructions from their client, never heard anything after that,i informed the Court, but more importantly the fact that the other-side yet again fabricated an event, by misleading the Master and the assigned Court that i had "declined" any agreement to proposed directions, is yet another sneaky manoeuvre by the other-side to achieve another un-warranted Order.

 

And the Court being made aware of this misrepresentation, ignored, which again supports to the abuse of process and any attempt to secure the ends of justice.

[callum1999]

So is that yes, you would still like help with your appeal please?

 

If you don't want a particular person's advice, then you need to put them on your Ignore list. However, you only have a couple of people helping so not wanting to hear from one of them may not be too productive.

 

HB

 

Yes HB, and thanks.

[BazzaS]

Here is the probable reason why the Master agreed to the other-sides proposals, hence why the case was moved

 

The other-side gave a misrepresentation to Master ? that the Claimant had declined any proposed directions pursuant to the Order made on the 25th May 2016, made by Master ?, on the 23rd June 2016..

 

On the 16th June 2016 the Claimant and before the misrepresentation made to the Master attempted to agree with the other-side, the directions which would have included the venue.

 

The other-side said that they would take instructions from their client, never heard anything after that,i informed the Court, but more importantly the fact that the other-side yet again fabricated an event, by misleading the Master and the assigned Court that i had "declined" any agreement to proposed directions, is yet another sneaky manoeuvre by the other-side to achieve another un-warranted Order.

 

And the Court being made aware of this misrepresentation, ignored, which again supports to the abuse of process and any attempt to secure the ends of justice.

 

Yet more "new information" 'pulled out of a hat' at the 11th hour.

 

1) can you prove it?

2) note my previous reply:

 

you didn't actually ask for the High Court clearly or effectively. You asked for "multi-track", which could be the County Court, and where you thought you were asking for the High Court, you were actually saying "it is too late for the Defendant to refute the jurisdiction of the courts of England & Wales". Based on your PofC and proposed directions alone, the High Court would likely have sent it to the County Court, without input from the D. If the D proposed the County Court too: foregone conclusion.

You could have (promptly!) appealed the choice of venue, but haven't mentioned doing so.

 

So, you'll no doubt have trouble proving it, but even if you can prove it :

You could have appealed the choice of venue. You didn't.

 

Your failure to appeal choice of venue (where you could have raised any alleged misrepresentation) means it isn't now grounds to appeal the strike out, in the same way that you are required to follow the appeals process as a pre-requisite for any following judicial review.

[callum1999]

Defendants draft order for directions

 

1. Transfer

 

1.1 The Claim be transfered to ? County Court

 

2 Allocation

 

2.1 The Claim be allocated to FAST TRACK

 

3 Hearing of application to strike out

 

3.1 A Hearing be listed for the first available after 18th July 2016 to here the Defendants application to strike out the Claimants claim.

 

 

 

3.

[callum1999]

When i requested the reasons why the claim would be suitable for fast track and moved jurisdiction from High Court to County Court the email response from those representing the solicitor were:

 

Our client considers the value of the claim and length of time required for the claim to be tried makes it suitable for the fast track as oppossed to the multi track.

 

If the claim is transferred to the fast track, it can be dealt with at Local County Court is due to it being geographically closest to both parties place of residence.

[callum1999]

When i requested the reasons why the claim would be suitable for fast track and moved jurisdiction from High Court to County Court the email response from those representing the solicitor were:

 

Our client considers the value of the claim and length of time required for the claim to be tried makes it suitable for the fast track as oppossed to the multi track.

 

If the claim is transferred to the fast track, it can be dealt with at Local County Court is due to it being geographically closest to both parties place of residence.

 

So in effect, we now have the solicitor who has been alleged as being negligent, deciding not only on the value of the claim against him but also the relevent track and court that should determined the claim against him..

[Ganymede]

So if the Claimant entered this as an exhibit on which to oppose his claim being struck out, and the judge says he is not interested in that evidence, even though that evidence comes from a previous solicitor/barrister representing the Claimant, that would show grounds for claim; is the (a) an unlawful act (b) abuse of power © abuse of equality in law (d) an abuse of court process.

 

A yes or no to a,b,c or d would suffice the question, thanks in advance

 

I'm sorry but letters from your previous solicitor/Barrister is not evidence a judge needs to consider. It's just the opinion of some lawyer and does not bind the Court in any way. The only opinion that matters is the Judges.

 

Same goes for what Shelter had to say.

 

Also, simply annexing these letters to a back of a witness statement would not have been sufficient in any event.

[Ganymede]

So in effect, we now have the solicitor who has been alleged as being negligent, deciding not only on the value of the claim against him but also the relevent track and court that should determined the claim against him..

 

Wait, I thought it was allocated to the Multi Track which is not what other other side wanted.

 

Forget about which Court it was heard in, that is done now. The Court have a very wide set of case management powers and they would have reviewed both party's Directions and come to a decision on their own.

 

There are much bigger issues that you need to worry about than this.

[callum1999]

So in effect, we now have the solicitor who has been alleged as being negligent, deciding not only on the value of the claim against him but also the relevent track and court that should determined the claim against him..

 

So a claim that had previously been allocated by the Master for multi track, was transferred to the County Court on the provisions that the other-side valued the claim for a figure that could be determined under the fast track procedure, because the local county court can deal with it.

 

How have they, the other-side proofed the value of the claim, on pure denial or presented evidence that would dismiss any previous Order that categorised the claim for a value that could not be determined under the track giving by Master ?., which was thrown out under the fast track procedure and by a judge who as i see it, acted on those provision and the value alleged but not proven as to be in a position in any event, to rule on the case because of the value and because of the nature of claim, that should have been considered by the appropriate Court and Judge that would be capable and have the authority as to dismiss a claim on what was a continued fabrication of facts that have run parallel with the Orders sought and granted, that have been achieved on the very same principle that has been adopted by those who see this as normal, wrong..

[callum1999]

I'm sorry but letters from your previous solicitor/Barrister is not evidence a judge needs to consider. It's just the opinion of some lawyer and does not bind the Court in any way. The only opinion that matters is the Judges.

 

Same goes for what Shelter had to say.

 

Also, simply annexing these letters to a back of a witness statement would not have been sufficient in any event.

 

I think you will find that a Judge has an obligation and a statutory duty to consider all the evidence.

 

The other-side and there legal team, were allowed to represent and present their case, or have they such supremacy and grace to be so different. I don't think so, they've no more rights than my previous legal team have, in proving a case.

[callum1999]

Wait, I thought it was allocated to the Multi Track which is not what other other side wanted.

 

Forget about which Court it was heard in, that is done now. The Court have a very wide set of case management powers and they would have reviewed both party's Directions and come to a decision on their own.

 

There are much bigger issues that you need to worry about than this.

 

No we wont forget about the Court that it was heard in, and lets not forget, any decision and any powers that the Court have, can only be imposed on facts and evidence received, the other-side misrepresented themselves and their client by wrongfully alleging that a previous order had been breached by me, failing to agree directions, another lie and one that would have been considered before any case management powers could have been imposed, which again are defining factors which will not be relevant, the case should not have been moved, ABUSE OF PROCESS.

[Ganymede]

So a claim that had previously been allocated by the Master for multi track, was transferred to the County Court on the provisions that the other-side valued the claim for a figure that could be determined under the fast track procedure, because the local county court can deal with it.

 

How have they, the other-side proofed the value of the claim, on pure denial or presented evidence that would dismiss any previous Order that categorised the claim for a value that could not be determined under the track giving by Master ?., which was thrown out under the fast track procedure and by a judge who as i see it, acted on those provision and the value alleged but not proven as to be in a position in any event, to rule on the case because of the value and because of the nature of claim, that should have been considered by the appropriate Court and Judge that would be capable and have the authority as to dismiss a claim on what was a continued fabrication of facts that have run parallel with the Orders sought and granted, that have been achieved on the very same principle that has been adopted by those who see this as normal, wrong..

 

Not sure what you're getting at as what evidence did you have to value your claim?

 

You pleaded negligence from the other side's solicitors regarding the personal injury claim. Your compensation for your claim had it not been struck out would likely have been less than £25k and so the Fast Track would have been the appropriate track.

 

Therefore the amount of compensation you were seeking for the professional negligence would also have likely fallen into the Fast Track.

 

However, you have said it was allocated to the Multi Track which is what you wanted.

 

I really don't know where you're going with this.

[Ganymede]

I think you will find that a Judge has an obligation and a statutory duty to consider all the evidence.

 

The other-side and there legal team, were allowed to represent and present their case, or have they such supremacy and grace to be so different. I don't think so, they've no more rights than my previous legal team have, in proving a case.

 

Not "evidence" the Court finds irrelevant or not filed at Court in the correct manner.

 

And you had the opportunity to present your case in Court yourself, or by using a solicitor.

 

Letters written to you by your former lawyers are not evidence and are not submissions to the Court therefore they were not given much, if any, weight.

[Ganymede]

No we wont forget about the Court that it was heard in, and lets not forget, any decision and any powers that the Court have, can only be imposed on facts and evidence received, the other-side misrepresented themselves and their client by wrongfully alleging that a previous order had been breached by me, failing to agree directions, another lie and one that would have been considered before any case management powers could have been imposed, which again are defining factors which will not be relevant, the case should not have been moved, ABUSE OF PROCESS.

 

The Judge has a huge amount of discretion when it comes to case management. The higher Courts will be reluctant to interfere with those kind of decisions.

 

You were not able to agree Directions with the other side though so what they said was accurate. In any event it's not something that the Judge is going to lend too much weight too.

 

It's usually in the Orders that the parties should try and agree Directions as it will save the Courts time. However, when liability is disputed and you are asking for the Directions like yours they were never going to be agreed between you as you would never have agreed to remove the part about them complying with the Notice to Admit facts for example.

 

There's nothing wrong with not being able or willing to agree to each other's proposed Directions and telling the Court this. It's not that important in the grand scheme of things whether Direction are agreed or not as ultimately the Court can make whatever Directions it wants pretty much.

 

No abuse of process there I'm afraid so not relevant to your appeal.

[callum1999]

So the most defining point and one on which an appeal could be relied upon, is that the case should have remained within the High Court and not transferred to the County Court.

 

There are now a number of factors that would support this.

 

The Defendants had no compelling evidence that (a) could show the value of the claim was suitable for fast track which was the reason for transfer, to the County Court.

 

What a load of nonsense, the Master and the High Court had already and on the balance of claim/defence bracketed the case under multi-track, so the other-side and their solicitor have dismissed such order to get it to fact track, and without one shred of evidence to suggest the claim was suitable for fast-track.

 

The case should have stayed where the claim was subsequently and correctly issued, and the excuse to (a) rely on the fast track, (b) in order for the local county court to deal with, which was to get the claim thrown out.