Precedents - PoC

[heisenberg]

Dear all,

Does anyone know of any good precedent sites? I know Atkin's Court Forms is a good resource but I think one needs to work in the legal profession to gain access.

In the alternative, could someone kindly tell me if the below formatting is okay for a discrimination claim?

My legal aid solicitor should really be helping me with this by they are not pulling their weight unfortunately.

Sincere thanks.

IN THE COUNTY COURT

Claim No: XXXXXXX

BETWEEN:-

MR X

Claimant

-and-

X

Defendant

_________________________________________

AMENDED PARTICULARS OF CLAIM
_________________________________________

At all material times:

1. The Claimant was disabled within the meaning of Section 6(1) and Schedule 1 of the Equality Act 2010.

2. ...

PARTICULARS OF BREACH OF STATUTORY DUTY

Direct discrimination

3. The Defendant discriminated directly against the Claimant by....

Indirect discrimination

4. The Defendant discriminated indirectly against the Claimant by....

PARTICULARS OF DAMAGES

5. By reason of the matters aforesaid, the Claimant suffered injury to his feelings and claims damages in accordance with the guidelines established in the cases of Vento v. Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police [2003] IRLR 102 and Da’Bell v. National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children [2009] UKEAT 0227.

The Claimant claims:

a) A declaration that the Defendant has discriminated against him;

b) Damages exceeding £5,000;

c) An Order requiring the Defendant to take such steps as the Court determines it should have taken in order to comply with its duty to make reasonable adjustments;

d) Interest pursuant to Section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984.


Re-DATED this day of April 2016


Statement of Truth

I believe that the facts stated in this Particulars of Claim are true.



Full name: ……………………………………………………

[wales01man]

Re: Precedents - PoC

What is indirect discrimination? The claim just states words not what the action swere

[heisenberg]

Re: Precedents - PoC

What is indirect discrimination? The claim just states words not what the action swere

Hi wales01man,

It is just the formatting I am concerned with hence the scarce info.

Attached is guidance on the different types of discrimination if you are interested.

[R0b]

Re: Precedents - PoC

Formatting looks fine to me, although you shouldn't be pleading case law in your particulars of claim, it should be a statement of facts only. Legal arguments and case law go into your skeleton argument and/or oral submissions.

[heisenberg]

Re: Precedents - PoC

Formatting looks fine to me, although you shouldn't be pleading case law in your particulars of claim, it should be a statement of facts only. Legal arguments and case law go into your skeleton argument and/or oral submissions.

Many thanks Rob.

[charitynjw]

Re: Precedents - PoC

Blimey, [MENTION=51689]heisenberg[/MENTION]!

Middle band 'Vento'?

Do you think that will fly?

( [MENTION=71570]R0b[/MENTION] for reference)

[heisenberg]

Re: Precedents - PoC

Blimey, @heisenberg!

Middle band 'Vento'?

Do you think that will fly?

( @R0b for reference)

It's just a template.

- - - Updated - - -

Just to confirm, a breach of a statutory duty is a breach of the law in general terms?

[R0b]

Re: Precedents - PoC

Usually a breach of statutory duty will be either a criminal or a tort depending on the legislation. The legislation will contain the offences for a breach but if not, then it will likely fall as negligence on most occasions.

P.s. your POC should be formatted correctly too - at least 1.5 lines space (I usually do double lines) and 3.5cm margins on either side as judges do like to make notes. And at least size 12 font but most prefer 14.

Edit: Also, just above your at "at all material times" you will need a line above that which says something like "These Particulars of Claim are in substitution for the Particulars of Claim dated XX XX 2016"

[charitynjw]

Re: Precedents - PoC

It's just a template.

- - - Updated - - -

Just to confirm, a breach of a statutory duty is a breach of the law in general terms?

Possibly.

Exactly which duty & exactly what breach?

[wales01man]

Re: Precedents - PoC

I am still unsure what the claim is for after all a claim must state a breach of law in detail in a criminal case the charge has to be detailed .

[heisenberg]

Re: Precedents - PoC

Possibly.

Exactly which duty & exactly what breach?

Various breaches of the Equality Act 2010 namely:

• Direct discrimination (I will probably discontinue this one in due course);
• Indirect discrimination;
• Discrimination arising from disability;
• Failure to make reasonable adjustments;
• Victimisation;
• Aiding contraventions (may even discontinue this one too).

- - - Updated - - -

I am still unsure what the claim is for after all a claim must state a breach of law in detail in a criminal case the charge has to be detailed .

I am just trying to get the overall structure right first. :tinysmile_twink_t2:

[charitynjw]

Re: Precedents - PoC

Various breaches of the Equality Act 2010 namely:

• Direct discrimination (I will probably discontinue this one in due course);
• Indirect discrimination;
• Discrimination arising from disability;
• Failure to make reasonable adjustments;
• Victimisation;
• Aiding contraventions (may even discontinue this one too).

- - - Updated - - -



I am just trying to get the overall structure right first. :tinysmile_twink_t2:

The case will turn on the facts.

Also, you will need to anticipate the other party's response to your exact complaints, & overcome them using balance of probability

[heisenberg]

Re: Precedents - PoC

The case will turn on the facts.

Also, you will need to anticipate the other party's response to your exact complaints, & overcome them using balance of probability

I anticipate denial at every level.

Proving these cases are, more often than not, an uphill battle. That is why the burden of proof is meant to reverse at some point (section 136) but the guidance/case law on that is unclear and these issues always rest on the discretion of the Judge.

[charitynjw]

Re: Precedents - PoC

I anticipate denial at every level.

Proving these cases are, more often than not, an uphill battle. That is why the burden of proof is meant to reverse at some point (section 136) but the guidance/case law on that is unclear and these issues always rest on the discretion of the Judge.

Made worse, of course, by the fact that, in more complex cases, the judge will probably be more inclined to listen to arguments put forward by a legal rep, esp if a barrister, who will speak the same 'legal' language.

But that's life - you're not always on a square & level playing-field!

[heisenberg]

Re: Precedents - PoC

Made worse, of course, by the fact that, in more complex cases, the judge will probably be more inclined to listen to arguments put forward by a legal rep, esp if a barrister, who will speak the same 'legal' language.

But that's life - you're not always on a square & level playing-field!

That's for bloody sure! :sad: