Tweet
Hello all.
Long time lurker but never really got involved. Never needed to.
But now, alas, I have to ask your thoughts on my case. Sorry this is so long.
My case was allocated to my local court several months ago. Claim is against an EU airline for delayed flight compensation.
Now, I cited the EU law on this in my claim, as my understanding was that EU law could and should be cited, and that I can take on an EU based airline, using the EU law, in the UK courts, if they fly to/from the UK, which this airline does. The problematic flight in question which was cancelled was the first of two flights – departing from Brazil, flying to the connection city in the EU, and then the 2nd flight returned me back to the UK.
This also appears to have been the way the defendant read the matter, as the whole defence is an attack on the points of my claim, and says nothing about any problem they might have with the statute I used.
I made submissions to the Judge about why the defence was misleading, in many ways, in order to ensure it was not struck out.
Rather oddly, the Judge struck it out, and stated the POC mentioned no viable law/claim that would see my claim progress. His last statement in the strike out order was that I should be mindful that I am liable to incur costs should I continue to pursue my claim, which seemed to me overly strict, unnecessary, and threatening.
The court sent me the above order, and said order gave me 70 days to make an application if I had a problem with my claim being struck out. I received this order in the mail, just before departing for a two week holiday to Spain. I called the court, and queried whether the 70 days was incorrect. And I also asked why the court was not emailing me orders, as arranged with the CCBC/MCOL. I was told that because the system only mentions this email note on certain screens, that sometimes staff miss this. However, he then stated he would check the 70 day query, and email me back.
I heard nothing more, left for Spain, and then discovered that there was an amended order sent to me which now stated 7 days. Again, this was only mailed, not emailed. I only discovered this new amended order two weeks so after it was sent, and then sent my application immediately. I state in my application that the only thing I can think that would cause the Judge to dismiss my claim, is that a) he had not seen my response to the defence, and taken said defence on face value, or B) I should be citing the UK version of the EU statute, which is identical in everything but name. I explained that the lateness of the application was due to my being on holiday, and not being emailed the orders as arranged.
I waited a week, and then discovered that a different Judge had struck out my application, for want of being filed timely. However I did not discover this last part until weeks later, which is important given what happened next.
I immediately called the court, to ask why I was not emailed the amended order, as arranged. I was not given satisfactory answers, so asked for a manager. Said manager told me MCOL should not be making arrangements to email me, and she tellingly would not answer as to the misinformation in my previous calls with her court staff. I then started recording the call, in order to take up this issue with MCOL. At the end of the call, I twice ask her to identify why my application was struck out. It is right there written in the order, but the recording clearly has this manager lying to me, stating that no reason is written on said order. I then asked her to double-check, and she repeats the above. So she lied, to dodge the bullet of her staff failing to email me the amended order, which caused all this.
I then lodged an appeal, as I had no idea what was going on, other than Judges acting erratically and court staff making things worse.
After this appeal was started, I got hold of the order dismissing my application, and found out I had been grossly misled by court staff and in particular this bullet-dodging manager.
So I cancelled the appeal, and made another application IMMEDIATLEY, mentioning all the above problematic issues.
The same Judge who originally struck my claim out, then responded on 27th June to state a new hearing should be arranged, and that the last order striking out my first application for being untimely was correctly made. However, what he then oddly said, and again, I believe this to be gross overreach, uncouth, and unfair in the extreme, he said that even if relief from sanctions is granted, I am still potentially liable for costs to be awarded against me!
So I am fighting the court staff and the Judge on this, as well as the defendant, it would appear.
I then called the court to ask whether there was any order as to the new hearing. I have called thrice in the last fortnight, and been told court staff won’t speak to me because I am recording calls, and hung up on.
Well, after three weeks and no hearing notice, and 6 emails sent with only one response, I called yesterday, INSISTED someone tell me what is going on, and found out there is a hearing scheduled for tomorrow when I am not even in the country.
The staff member I spoke to initially told me that, even though the hearing notice was drawn up on the same day as the order stating a hearing should be scheduled, that this was sent separately, and he initially cited an old address where it was sent, which would make sense as I have not received any hearing notice. He then changed this and said it was sent to my current UK address. Like I said, I have never seen any notice of a hearing.
I am very suspicious.
I have now made an urgent application to attend via telephone. Oh, and said staff member from yesterday refused to read out the rest of the order to me, so I have no idea what is expected of me for tomorrow.
I guess I have written the above because whilst I am certain of my case against this airline, I am shocked at the negligence of court staff and the overbearing nature of this particular Judge. I have done nothing wrong here and yet his last comment in particular, i.e. even if relief from sanctions is granted, you are still potentially liable for costs to be awarded against you” is worrying me.
I don’t see how the above could be the case if my application IS successful.
I filed POC, and the defence had no issue with my using EU law in my arguments.
I believe the first Judge was wrong to strike out my claim. Probably because he did not see my rebuttals to the defence. But even if he was right to and I cited the wrong law, it is identical to the UK statute in everything but name, and my application to amend should have been enough to deal with this without further to do.
Then we have the issue of the lateness of said application. Again, this is not my fault. I was on holiday, I was the one who identified potential problems with the 70 days allowed to make an application, and I arranged with both MCOL and the court to email me orders. This is definitely not my fault.
So if and when my application tomorrow for relief is successful, how am I possibly liable for costs? Even if the defence oppose my application, this hearing will be the first time that they have done any work since the defence was filed, and if that work to oppose is not fruitful, I really don’t see how a Judge could state I am on the hook for costs? Especially as the case was probably struck out originally because of their terribly misleading defence.
So please any advice you lot have would be much appreciated!
Long time lurker but never really got involved. Never needed to.
But now, alas, I have to ask your thoughts on my case. Sorry this is so long.
My case was allocated to my local court several months ago. Claim is against an EU airline for delayed flight compensation.
Now, I cited the EU law on this in my claim, as my understanding was that EU law could and should be cited, and that I can take on an EU based airline, using the EU law, in the UK courts, if they fly to/from the UK, which this airline does. The problematic flight in question which was cancelled was the first of two flights – departing from Brazil, flying to the connection city in the EU, and then the 2nd flight returned me back to the UK.
This also appears to have been the way the defendant read the matter, as the whole defence is an attack on the points of my claim, and says nothing about any problem they might have with the statute I used.
I made submissions to the Judge about why the defence was misleading, in many ways, in order to ensure it was not struck out.
Rather oddly, the Judge struck it out, and stated the POC mentioned no viable law/claim that would see my claim progress. His last statement in the strike out order was that I should be mindful that I am liable to incur costs should I continue to pursue my claim, which seemed to me overly strict, unnecessary, and threatening.
The court sent me the above order, and said order gave me 70 days to make an application if I had a problem with my claim being struck out. I received this order in the mail, just before departing for a two week holiday to Spain. I called the court, and queried whether the 70 days was incorrect. And I also asked why the court was not emailing me orders, as arranged with the CCBC/MCOL. I was told that because the system only mentions this email note on certain screens, that sometimes staff miss this. However, he then stated he would check the 70 day query, and email me back.
I heard nothing more, left for Spain, and then discovered that there was an amended order sent to me which now stated 7 days. Again, this was only mailed, not emailed. I only discovered this new amended order two weeks so after it was sent, and then sent my application immediately. I state in my application that the only thing I can think that would cause the Judge to dismiss my claim, is that a) he had not seen my response to the defence, and taken said defence on face value, or B) I should be citing the UK version of the EU statute, which is identical in everything but name. I explained that the lateness of the application was due to my being on holiday, and not being emailed the orders as arranged.
I waited a week, and then discovered that a different Judge had struck out my application, for want of being filed timely. However I did not discover this last part until weeks later, which is important given what happened next.
I immediately called the court, to ask why I was not emailed the amended order, as arranged. I was not given satisfactory answers, so asked for a manager. Said manager told me MCOL should not be making arrangements to email me, and she tellingly would not answer as to the misinformation in my previous calls with her court staff. I then started recording the call, in order to take up this issue with MCOL. At the end of the call, I twice ask her to identify why my application was struck out. It is right there written in the order, but the recording clearly has this manager lying to me, stating that no reason is written on said order. I then asked her to double-check, and she repeats the above. So she lied, to dodge the bullet of her staff failing to email me the amended order, which caused all this.
I then lodged an appeal, as I had no idea what was going on, other than Judges acting erratically and court staff making things worse.
After this appeal was started, I got hold of the order dismissing my application, and found out I had been grossly misled by court staff and in particular this bullet-dodging manager.
So I cancelled the appeal, and made another application IMMEDIATLEY, mentioning all the above problematic issues.
The same Judge who originally struck my claim out, then responded on 27th June to state a new hearing should be arranged, and that the last order striking out my first application for being untimely was correctly made. However, what he then oddly said, and again, I believe this to be gross overreach, uncouth, and unfair in the extreme, he said that even if relief from sanctions is granted, I am still potentially liable for costs to be awarded against me!
So I am fighting the court staff and the Judge on this, as well as the defendant, it would appear.
I then called the court to ask whether there was any order as to the new hearing. I have called thrice in the last fortnight, and been told court staff won’t speak to me because I am recording calls, and hung up on.
Well, after three weeks and no hearing notice, and 6 emails sent with only one response, I called yesterday, INSISTED someone tell me what is going on, and found out there is a hearing scheduled for tomorrow when I am not even in the country.
The staff member I spoke to initially told me that, even though the hearing notice was drawn up on the same day as the order stating a hearing should be scheduled, that this was sent separately, and he initially cited an old address where it was sent, which would make sense as I have not received any hearing notice. He then changed this and said it was sent to my current UK address. Like I said, I have never seen any notice of a hearing.
I am very suspicious.
I have now made an urgent application to attend via telephone. Oh, and said staff member from yesterday refused to read out the rest of the order to me, so I have no idea what is expected of me for tomorrow.
I guess I have written the above because whilst I am certain of my case against this airline, I am shocked at the negligence of court staff and the overbearing nature of this particular Judge. I have done nothing wrong here and yet his last comment in particular, i.e. even if relief from sanctions is granted, you are still potentially liable for costs to be awarded against you” is worrying me.
I don’t see how the above could be the case if my application IS successful.
I filed POC, and the defence had no issue with my using EU law in my arguments.
I believe the first Judge was wrong to strike out my claim. Probably because he did not see my rebuttals to the defence. But even if he was right to and I cited the wrong law, it is identical to the UK statute in everything but name, and my application to amend should have been enough to deal with this without further to do.
Then we have the issue of the lateness of said application. Again, this is not my fault. I was on holiday, I was the one who identified potential problems with the 70 days allowed to make an application, and I arranged with both MCOL and the court to email me orders. This is definitely not my fault.
So if and when my application tomorrow for relief is successful, how am I possibly liable for costs? Even if the defence oppose my application, this hearing will be the first time that they have done any work since the defence was filed, and if that work to oppose is not fruitful, I really don’t see how a Judge could state I am on the hook for costs? Especially as the case was probably struck out originally because of their terribly misleading defence.
So please any advice you lot have would be much appreciated!
Comment