SPML

[martin2006]

Thanks seminole, but really it wasnt down to me, it was down to the judge. He saw straight through the barrister and did the shooting himself.

Brilliant

[gizmo111]

Well done MArtin - a good result for the day:D

[dolly]

Good news that result, Martin

[zootscoot]

Good news on the small claims allocation! Even though you didn't know that it would be an issue.

 

So does this mean that you will get a new hearing date and that the hearing on the 28th is just a consideration of summary judgment or is the hearing the summary judgment and the final hearing?

 

Well done

 

Zoot

[martin2006]

the hearing on the 28th will be a 2hour slot for hearing the summary judgement and a new date for the trial will be set sometime before the end of may.

I think iwill need to do some serious swatting up on it all by the 28th coz i felt really out of my depth, although now that ive been inside the judges chambers and seen what its all about, that takes away alot of the stress in itself. At 12.28 the other day, i just wanted to turn around, go home and quit, especially after the recent strike outs.

 

Is it likely to be the same judge next tie do you think or will it be the judge named on the cour papers for the 28th?

 

If it the same judge im definately in with a fighting chance.

 

He was seriously unimpressed with the fact that SPML sent a barrister. To be honest though it was fun watching him squirm!!!

[martin2006]

ive had 2 letters. One from the court and one from SGH

 

The one from the cout is an N24 General form of judgement or order.

1. The defendants application for summary judgement is adjourned to the small claim track hearing (28-3-07)

2. The defendants application in the face of the court for re-allocation and permission to obtain expert evidence is dismissed

3.The hearing on 28-3-07 is to be vacated and re-listed on first available date, time estimate, 1 day.

4. Parties to exchange lay witness evidence and disclosure list is extended to 19-2-07

 

 

 

Letter from SGH

 

 

We refer to our clients recent application to strike out and to the order of district judge ************* to adjourn.

You may be aware of a recent strike out application of an ERC claim that was heard in the central london county court last week. The lender was Kensington. The judge ordered that the claim be struck out and the claimant pay the defendants costs. In view of this could you confirm whether you still wish to pursue your claim. In the event that you do, we are instructed to seek our costs should you lose which we anticipate to be in the thousands of pounds. Whilst it is unusual to seek and be awarded costa in the small claims track, it is possible to do so, particularly where the other party has acted unreasonably. We beleive that in the light of this most recent decision referred to above ( which resulted in all the claimants against the Halifax withdrawing their claims) and assuming you lose, the court would find that you acted unreasonably and may award costs against you.

In respect of the dismissal of our clients application for re-allocation to the fast or multi track and for expert witness evidence to be admitted, we are currently awaiting instructions to appeal the the decision of the district judge and will advise you of this in due course. Obviously if our client were succesful in having the claim re-allocated you will become liable for our clients costs should you lose.

Finally we note parties are to exchange witness statements by 19-2-07. we would be grateful if you grant us an indulgence of a further 2 weeks in which to serve these documents.

 

 

 

Thoughts anyone?

 

 

I am currently drafting a response to this letter asking for reduced settlement providing no costs are sought.

 

 

What do you lot think?

[martin2006]

Does anyone know who the kensington case was with?

[zootscoot]

Not aware of one in London last week!

 

They are probably referring to Jamorgan's although that was in Wales and a couple of weeks ago now.

 

The threat of costs is pure intimidatory. You have a realistic legal argument. Having read the transcript of Jamorgan's case I am more convinced in the validity of the claims. There may well be an appeal pending. If you go to court with a valid argument there is no way the judge will award costs against you. Take along also a list of settled claims and claim no of Priestly's case where the Defendant's application to strike out was refused.

 

Its so nice of them to dosh out all these threats and then have the cheek to ask you for more time to disclose the documents!

 

Have you done your bundle yet?

 

If not Pm me your e-mail address and I'll send you some stuff.

 

If you do want to go down the settlement route thats perfectly understandable.

 

All the best whatever you decide to do.

 

Zoot

[martin2006]

Thanks Zoot, i will pm you my e-mail, please send anything you can think of especially priestleys claim no etc

is the list of settled claims out of court settlements or judgements?

Also when i said last week for the kensington case it would have been first week in feb i guess looking at the date on SGH letter

[Les Gunn]

martin2006,

 

Good Luck - I hope you kick their arse, like I wanted to do!

 

[martin2006]

Thanks Les, and hope all is well with you and your mum.

 

Ok guys i need some urgent help. I have to file with the court on monday and need access to the following case histories if anybody knows where to find them.

1. D C Builders V Rees (1966)

2. Interfoto V Stilletto Visual Programmes Ltd (1988)

3 Associated Distributions V Hall (1938)

4 Euro London Appointments V Claessens Int. Ltd (2006)

5 Expert Credit Guarantee Dept. V Universal Oil Products

 

Any or as much help required with these as possible

 

Many thanks

 

Martin

[zootscoot]

Euro London v Claessens:

 

Euro London Appointments Ltd. v Claessens International Ltd. [2006] EWCA Civ 385 (06 April 2006)

 

Interfoto v stiletto:

 

Interfoto Picture Library Ltd v Stiletto Visual Programmes Ltd [1987] EWCA Civ 6 (12 November 1987)

 

I'll e-mail you Associated Distributors v Hall

 

I'll try to get the others from work tommmorrow.

[paulpb123]

Zoot,

Did you get my email regarding access to database? They should all be there. Martin, pm me your email and I'll send you the others.

Paul

[zootscoot]

Yes thanks Paul, but for some reason my home computer want let me access it. I can't get any secure sites from home. I can get on from work.

 

Cheers

 

Zoot

[martin2006]

What can i say guys, once again superb.

 

Thanks

 

Martin

[zootscoot]

Sorry Martin I forgot to get them today did Paul get them to you?

[martin2006]

No problem Zoot, Paul got them for me.

 

I had to send the bundle in without them though and a note to say they will follow.

 

As yet i havent recieved SGH defence which should have been here by 4.00pm today so i cant see them complaining. Also the courts allow the sols to get away with late filing so why should i be any different.

 

 

On to swatting up though now.

 

Martin

[gizmo111]

Whats happening with this now - is there a court date ?

[martin2006]

I had a letter from SGH saying that they had applied to the courts to extend the service of papers date to 9-mar. The hearing for the strike out is on 28-3-07. Other than that theres nothing else to report. I havent yet had a response to my offer to settle letter but who knows, anythings possible.

[mrsfoot]

Waiting game then martin!! Oh how i know how that feels after my journey with Swift lol

[gizmo111]

Good Luck with this tomorrow Martin

[mrsfoot]

Lots of good luck sent your way......but doubt you will need it as you seem to have things sewn tightly

[zootscoot]

All the very very best of luck Martin!

[freestone]

Hi Martin How did it go??? I hope you are celebrating a strike out victory!!

kevin

[freestone]

Hi Martin

Whatever happened to this claim on 28th March. I have issued proceedings against SPML ( all for charges no ERC yet!). So very interested to see how you got on. Cheers K