Hearing next month, need help with my witness statement/ skeleton argument pls

[jackmarak]

They have been edited massively.
Can I not add information that I know the tenants company (relating to their contract) has been liquidated?

[jaguarsuk]

They have been edited massively.
Can I not add information that I know the tenants company (relating to their contract) has been liquidated?

No need to, the tenants have no right to contract with them as they aren't the land owner nor did he convey his responsibilities to them. Even if still trading that contract is with the wrong party and as such worthless.

[jackmarak]

True that, I'd be trying to prove something not worth proving.
I will be going court now, I have emailed to ask them how I can change my mind/ notify them that I will be going.
Just need to let the claimant know when it has been confirmed.

Can my skeleton argument literally just be the IPC Code number quoting the permission needs to be from a landlord + my landlord statement?

Or do I have to include every law that was mentioned in my defence + witness statements?

Kind regards,
Jack.

[jaguarsuk]

True that, I'd be trying to prove something not worth proving.
I will be going court now, I have emailed to ask them how I can change my mind/ notify them that I will be going.
Just need to let the claimant know when it has been confirmed.

Can my skeleton argument literally just be the IPC Code number quoting the permission needs to be from a landlord + my landlord statement?

Or do I have to include every law that was mentioned in my defence + witness statements?

Kind regards,
Jack.

Argue everything in your defence as if the main argument fails you might still win on one of the others. Don't forget you will not know whether you have won until the judge rules and that is after both parties have put forward all their arguments.

It may be the case on proving the first point the judge stops you and rules.

I once stated my point and the defendant responded, then I ask the judge if I might respond - he looked at me over his glasses simply saying "you're not going to need to" before tearing the defendant's barrister a new one and then ruling for me. The point is that your first point can be enough, but you should argue all points until the judge decides to call a halt to proceedings and dismiss their claim.

[jackmarak]

Understood, I will be fine with the main argument as I have the IPC Code to recite and why it is relevant to my defence. (No Authority)

However, my other defence is that "It wasn't made clear what is defined as the premises" (I never left the premises)
I wouldn't know what IPC code to fight this with.


and I noticed they have taken 3 pictures of the car but not the area, their pictures don't cover where I was stood.
So again, how I would use an IPC code to fight that I was stood somewhere that they haven't pictured and was around the corner of the building.

[jaguarsuk]

However, my other defence is that "It wasn't made clear what is defined as the premises" (I never left the premises)
I wouldn't know what IPC code to fight this with.


and I noticed they have taken 3 pictures of the car but not the area, their pictures don't cover where I was stood.
So again, how I would use an IPC code to fight that I was stood somewhere that they haven't pictured and was around the corner of the building.

I'm not as au fait with the IPC Code as ostell is, await their answer.

For the benefit of Ostell not having to read back:

• Defendant parked on land
• Claimant issued PCN
• Claimant contracted to the tenant on the land to issue tickets
• Claimant did not have a contract with the land owner nor did he convey his responsibilities to the tenant to allow them to contract with the claimant as his agent
• Defendant has a witness statement from land lord confirming no authority given to the claimant to ticket and the defendant has his permission to park
• Above forms main part of Defendants argument, but has questions surrounding supplementary arguments to cover all bases above.

[jackmarak]

bump!!