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.
Under Rules 26-28, after the ET3 is received by the Tribunal a judge will review pleadings of both parties and analyse if there is a case to be heard.
The Judge will make case management directions based on this case analysis, this maybe a preliminary hearing, a full hearing, or judicial mediation.
Under Rules 27 and 28, If the Judge feels that a case has no reasonable prospect of success, or the response has no reasonable grounds to defend the case raised, the Judge will ask that party for further written submissions as to why the case should not be dismissed. Should these further submissions not be disclosed, or again fail to show a reasonable case/respondent, default judgement will be award to the other party.
If further submissions are made, then an oral hearing maybe arranged to hear the case in full.
This should help to limit unwarranted claims and make Claimants think twice about raising heat of the moment unfounded claims. Fees will not be refunded if a case is dismissed for holding no meritable grounds, which again should make Claimants think twice before making a claim.
This also shows the importance of the pleadings in ongoing cases. It is therefore key that the response is detailed, however concise. Judges will not want to read through waffling submissions as they will be under time pressure.