Do as the Court tells you

legal updates

Due to the onus being on the consumer to prove his claim against our client and having not filed any such documentation, it was requested the claim be struck out.

Read our disclaimer keyboard_arrow_down

This website content is intended as a general guide to law as it applies to the motor trade. Lawgistics has taken every effort to ensure that the contents are as accurate and up to date as at the date of first publication.

The laws and opinions expressed within this website may be varied as the law develops. As such we cannot accept liability for or the consequence of, any change of law, or official guidelines since publication or any misuse of the information provided.

The opinions in this website are based upon the experience of the authors and it must be recognised that only the courts and recognised tribunals can interpret the law with authority.

Examples given within the website are based on the experience of the authors and centre upon issues that commonly give rise to disputes. Each situation in practice will be different and may comprise several points commented upon.

If you have any doubt about the correct legal position you should seek further legal advice from Lawgistics or a suitably qualified solicitor. We cannot accept liability for your failure to take professional advice where it should reasonably be sought by a prudent person.

All characters are fictitious and should not be taken as referring to any person living or dead.

Use of this website shall be considered acceptance of the terms of the disclaimer presented above.

A Claimant (consumer) issued proceedings against our client, although  we were advising and assisting our client before proceedings were issued, the Claimant was not happy with the answer they had received, so they issued further proceedings which we again assisted with defending the claim.

Proceedings take months and certain orders given by the Court need to be followed by both parties. One of the orders is a Witness Statement from each party, to be filed with any evidence the party intends to rely on at the future hearing. A copy must be filed with the other party as well as the Court. In this particular case, the Claimant did not follow the order and as such no Witness Statement nor documentation of evidence was ever served to the Court or our client.

Due to the onus being on the consumer to prove his claim against our client and having not filed any such documentation, it was requested the claim be struck out.

The Judge agreed and the claim was dismissed as well as costs being awarded to our client!

The case is an example of the need to follow the Court orders given.

Automotive ComplianceWE TALK YOUR LANGUAGE, WE KNOW YOUR BUSINESS

Need help with keeping on track with FCA Regulation and Compliance? Partner with Automotive Compliance

Roxanne BradleyLitigation ExecutiveRead More by this author

Related Legal Updates

Court Chaos: When “The Finance Company” isn’t a company at all

A consumer’s claim over a financed vehicle descended into farce after the judge ordered “The Finance Company” to be joined as a defendant, without naming the real lender.

To Strike or Not to Strike (Again)?

Discover how mastering CPR 3.4 strike-outs versus CPR 24 summary judgement can end weak claims swiftly and slash your litigation costs.

Can You Really Claim for That? Remote Losses and the Line the Courts Draw

Ever had someone claim something so far-fetched you’d swear it came from a pub rant about aliens?

Refund and Repairs? The Hidden Trap in Overreaching Civil Claims

Customers often try to claim a refund, repairs, and compensation for inconvenience all at once, but the courts rarely indulge “Earth, Moon and stars” claims.

County Court Chaos: When the Portal Fails and Justice Falters

When the County Court portal went down minutes before a 4pm deadline, the response we received summed up a wider problem users now face.

The photo you didn’t take could cost you thousands

Proving a vehicle’s condition at handover is the difference between recovering costs and footing the bill.

To strike or not to strike

Courts are reluctant to strike out a claim or defence, even where there are procedural breaches. Here’s when CPR 3.4(2) genuinely applies, why summary judgment under Part 24 may be a better route, and what judges look for before taking the drastic step.

Get in touch

Complete the form to get in touch or via our details below:

Phone
01480 455500
Address

Vinpenta House
High Causeway
Whittlesey
Peterborough
PE7 1AE

By submitting this quote you agree to our Terms & Conditions and Privacy & Cookies Policy.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.