Winning cases in court


The factors for the court to decide are: whether the breach was serious, why it occurred, and all other circumstances.

Author: Nona Bowkis
Reading time: 3 minutes

This article is 4 months old.

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.

When it comes to court cases, it is important to follow all the orders and rules of the court.

At a recent hearing, our client’s opponent submitted their witness statement late. We wrote to the solicitor representing the opponent when they finally submitted their statement and invited them to make an application to the court to allow late submission. The other side’s solicitor decided against this as they said: “Our (Lawgistics’) client had not been prejudiced.”

Fast forward to the hearing, and we asked our client’s legal advocate to bring the opponent’s late submission to the judge’s attention in an attempt to not allow them to present any evidence. The general rule is only those who have submitted a properly signed witness statement can give evidence at a hearing. The opponent in this case had submitted a late witness statement and also included the old “statement of truth” declaration in the document. Referring to both the late submission and the incorrect “statement of truth”, our client’s advocate was able to present a strong argument to the judge that the opponent had lost their chance to have their say.

For some judges that would have been the end of the opponent’s case, but this judge delved a little further and read the contents of the late statement. On reading, the judge decided even if they did allow the opponent to speak, they had no real evidence to support the case against our client.  


Websites for dealers small and large

Composer is a next-gen automotive platform that has been designed from the ground up to give you an intuitive way to promote your stock. You have extensive stock management options, and you'll gain a brilliantly responsive new website to advertise your stock, starting at just £39.99/month.

The judge applied the correct test, which was not whether our client had been prejudiced or not by the late statement, but by the factors set in a precedent case named Denton. By virtue of the Denton case, the factors for the court to decide are: whether the breach was serious, why it occurred, and all other circumstances. In this matter, the judge decided that the incorrect “statement of truth” wasn’t itself serious, but the late submission of the witness statement was. A more lenient judge may have allowed the other side to get away with this, but we gave our client’s advocate a copy of the letter we sent to the opposing solicitors inviting them to make an application and their reply to the letter. This led the judge to determine they had every chance to make an application, but still didn’t. Adding this element to the fact that their evidence was weak, the judge simply ruled for our client as our case was strong and well presented, both by the advocate on the day and from the work we completed on behalf of the client in the year or so the case had been ongoing.

A satisfying victory for us and our client! And a reminder that in a court system which can sometimes be a lottery, detail and promptness, do matter.

Nona Bowkis

Legal Advisor

Read more by this author

Getting in touch

You can contact us via the form or you can call us on 01480 455500.