Tweet
Hi,
I issued proceedings against an ex-friend, in respect of an invoice for services, who refused to pay it, and denied there was ever an arrangement to pay. It's for Internet hosting fees, for a site that lived on my servers for six years, and which he has charged onwards, to his own client. He also hacked the servers and stole a database that I was demanding an admin/release fee for. The database theft left an audit trail, so cannot be denied.
Since we used to be friends, there's no written agreement. However, based on the principles of quantum meruit, I'm claiming that he is trying to unjustly enrich himself at my expense and, in the case of the database theft, he's a criminal (Computer Misuse Act 1990 section1), and thus his side of the story cannot be believed.
He hired a solicitor, and they've applied to have the case struck out.
I was under the impression that the Small Claims Court was an arena in which one could talk in lay terms, and not need to be any kind of expert in tort law, thus:
"I cleaned Mrs. Jones's windows, and she's now refusing to pay me. I sent her a letter before action, and I now ask the court to consider my case."
As such, surely an application to strike out is misconceived in the context of the Small Claims Court?
The solicitor appears to be asking for a mini-trial, in which they can triumph via procedure over merit. They've also refused to acknowledge my request for disclosure of pertinent documents, and so I've applied for a compelling order (via an N244 application), and for the strike out hearing to be stayed pending them fulfilling their legal obligations to disclose documents to me via a request I made under CPR 31.
Their application has been sent for listing (no date yet). Since my application follows their application to strike out, I'm having difficulties finding out how to impress upon the court staff that my application MUST be heard first, as I intend to submit a reply to the defence and resist their application to strike out, and the requested documentation is a pre-requisite for me to do both those things.
That they are abusing the court process is obvious. They've totally ignored my disclosure request, on a childlike "What are you going to do about it?" basis, and are trying to get their strike out hearing to go ahead prior to my application for compelled disclosure. The disclosure I've requested bolsters my case, and so obviously that's why they are resisting my request.
I've done a fair bit of Googling, but can't seem to find exact answers to my questions which, to re-iterate, are:
Is a strike out application relevant in the context of the SCC?
Can they simply ignore my request for disclosure, and hope the court schedules their hearing prior to my application for compelled disclosure going ahead?
If the court staff cannot see common sense, and schedule my application hearing before their requested hearing to strike my case out, can I show up for the strike out hearing, show the judge that I've applied for compelled disclosure, and ask for the matter to be stayed until they comply with CPR31? My application is pending, but stuck in the absurd office system.
Any pointers, even to relevant online resources on this exact subject, would be very much appreciated.
Max
I issued proceedings against an ex-friend, in respect of an invoice for services, who refused to pay it, and denied there was ever an arrangement to pay. It's for Internet hosting fees, for a site that lived on my servers for six years, and which he has charged onwards, to his own client. He also hacked the servers and stole a database that I was demanding an admin/release fee for. The database theft left an audit trail, so cannot be denied.
Since we used to be friends, there's no written agreement. However, based on the principles of quantum meruit, I'm claiming that he is trying to unjustly enrich himself at my expense and, in the case of the database theft, he's a criminal (Computer Misuse Act 1990 section1), and thus his side of the story cannot be believed.
He hired a solicitor, and they've applied to have the case struck out.
I was under the impression that the Small Claims Court was an arena in which one could talk in lay terms, and not need to be any kind of expert in tort law, thus:
"I cleaned Mrs. Jones's windows, and she's now refusing to pay me. I sent her a letter before action, and I now ask the court to consider my case."
As such, surely an application to strike out is misconceived in the context of the Small Claims Court?
The solicitor appears to be asking for a mini-trial, in which they can triumph via procedure over merit. They've also refused to acknowledge my request for disclosure of pertinent documents, and so I've applied for a compelling order (via an N244 application), and for the strike out hearing to be stayed pending them fulfilling their legal obligations to disclose documents to me via a request I made under CPR 31.
Their application has been sent for listing (no date yet). Since my application follows their application to strike out, I'm having difficulties finding out how to impress upon the court staff that my application MUST be heard first, as I intend to submit a reply to the defence and resist their application to strike out, and the requested documentation is a pre-requisite for me to do both those things.
That they are abusing the court process is obvious. They've totally ignored my disclosure request, on a childlike "What are you going to do about it?" basis, and are trying to get their strike out hearing to go ahead prior to my application for compelled disclosure. The disclosure I've requested bolsters my case, and so obviously that's why they are resisting my request.
I've done a fair bit of Googling, but can't seem to find exact answers to my questions which, to re-iterate, are:
Is a strike out application relevant in the context of the SCC?
Can they simply ignore my request for disclosure, and hope the court schedules their hearing prior to my application for compelled disclosure going ahead?
If the court staff cannot see common sense, and schedule my application hearing before their requested hearing to strike my case out, can I show up for the strike out hearing, show the judge that I've applied for compelled disclosure, and ask for the matter to be stayed until they comply with CPR31? My application is pending, but stuck in the absurd office system.
Any pointers, even to relevant online resources on this exact subject, would be very much appreciated.
Max
Comment