Tweet
Solicitors for the defendant prepared the trial bundle for the hearing and deliberately stated a 'lease " was included in the bundle but put the ' counterpart lease' in the bundle this supported the argument they wanted to put forward hence the bundle did not contain the executed copy by the landlord that i provided durinfg disclosure. I obtained this from land registry in order to shop deception.
At trial it was concluded by the Judge that the old and new lease were identical based on representation by counsel for the defendant both of these were not disclosed or included in the trial bundle. So i had never seen them and the Judge had never seen them. Relying on counsel oral representation.
Cousel also put forward information which led the Judge to make a wrong conclusion despite the solicitors having the correct information.
The defendant was asked the same question and also confirmed the old and new lease were identical. They were not. Having appealed and obtained a court transcript as evidence i pray that my case is read properly.
Needed some guidance on how do I prove fraud on the court.
My barrister I think may have been compromised. At the outset of the case he agreed that the evidence was overwhelming but a week befor the hearing he explains his cost for attending the hearing 5k before and 5k after but should we loose he wont come after me for the 5k.
In his submission the one point which would have won me the case "they do delay" which I had unequivocal evidence including false infromation in a defence statement verified by a statement of truth my barrister failed to mention which the Judge noted in her Judgement.
If I won the case the defendants under the misrepresentation act could have been liable for damages in excess of 700k. It is an ethical dilemma i suppose.
last point the defence contained a bare denial. They denied an allegation in my particulars of claim but their version of events was false and proved at trial. Judge failed to consider this. My understanding was that if a defence contains a bare denial it could be struck out. Is this still possible on appeal.
TS
At trial it was concluded by the Judge that the old and new lease were identical based on representation by counsel for the defendant both of these were not disclosed or included in the trial bundle. So i had never seen them and the Judge had never seen them. Relying on counsel oral representation.
Cousel also put forward information which led the Judge to make a wrong conclusion despite the solicitors having the correct information.
The defendant was asked the same question and also confirmed the old and new lease were identical. They were not. Having appealed and obtained a court transcript as evidence i pray that my case is read properly.
Needed some guidance on how do I prove fraud on the court.
My barrister I think may have been compromised. At the outset of the case he agreed that the evidence was overwhelming but a week befor the hearing he explains his cost for attending the hearing 5k before and 5k after but should we loose he wont come after me for the 5k.
In his submission the one point which would have won me the case "they do delay" which I had unequivocal evidence including false infromation in a defence statement verified by a statement of truth my barrister failed to mention which the Judge noted in her Judgement.
If I won the case the defendants under the misrepresentation act could have been liable for damages in excess of 700k. It is an ethical dilemma i suppose.
last point the defence contained a bare denial. They denied an allegation in my particulars of claim but their version of events was false and proved at trial. Judge failed to consider this. My understanding was that if a defence contains a bare denial it could be struck out. Is this still possible on appeal.
TS
Comment