header-logo header-logo

Court of Appeal rules on attendance in small claims hearings

29 March 2023
Issue: 8019 / Categories: Legal News , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail
A claimant can ‘attend’ a hearing even if they are absent, the Court of Appeal has held.

In Owen v Black Horse [2023] EWCA Civ 325, the case turned on the meaning of the phrase in CPR 27.9, on small claims, ‘if a claimant does not attend the hearing’. The court also considered whether the phrase meant the same in small claims hearings and in higher value cases.

The High Court and the district court had both held the meaning to be: ‘if the claimant is not present at the hearing, even if he is represented by his solicitor’.

A dispute between the claimant, Owen, and the defendant, Black Horse, was allocated to the small claims track and the parties were told that if they were not going to attend the hearing they must inform the court in writing seven days prior. If they did not attend and did not give notice, then the district judge could strike out their claim.

Owen did not attend but his solicitor did. The judge struck out the claim.

Allowing Owen’s appeal, Lady Justice Elisabeth Laing, giving the lead judgment, said there was ‘no authority at this level on the interpretation of rule 27.9’ or on the meaning of the phrase a party ‘does not attend’ the trial in rule 39,3.

However, she said the views of Gross J in Rouse v Freeman (2002) Times, 8 January that a party ‘attended’ a trial if he was represented, and of Nugee J in Falmouth House Ltd v Abou-Hamdan [2017] EWHC 779 (Ch) agreeing with Gross J, while not binding on the court, ‘merit respect’.

Laing LJ said she accepted there were ‘significant differences between the small claims track and the other tracks’ but said there was ‘no good reason’ why ‘similar provisions in the CPR, with apparently similar functions, but which apply to different tracks, are to be interpreted differently… The essential point is that a party to litigation is entitled to represent himself, or to be represented by a legal representative or representatives. Part 27 does not expressly impinge on that right.’

Issue: 8019 / Categories: Legal News , Procedure & practice
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Maria Karaiskos KC, Church Court Chambers

NLJ Career Profile: Maria Karaiskos KC, Church Court Chambers

Maria Karaiskos KC, recently appointed as the first female head of Church Court Chambers, discusses breaking down barriers, the lure of the courtroom, and the power of storytelling

Kingsley Napley—Jenny Higgins

Kingsley Napley—Jenny Higgins

Legal director joins regulatory practice to lead offering for actuarial sector

Bolt Burdon Kemp—Alan Collins & Danielle Vincent

Bolt Burdon Kemp—Alan Collins & Danielle Vincent

Bolt Burdon Kemp acquires Hugh James’ abuse team

NEWS
Writing in NLJ this week, Kelvin Rutledge KC of Cornerstone Barristers and Genevieve Screeche-Powell of Field Court Chambers examine the Court of Appeal’s rejection of a discrimination challenge to Tower Hamlets’ housing database
Michael Zander KC, Emeritus Professor at LSE, tracks the turbulent passage of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill through the House of Lords in this week's issue of NLJ. Two marathon debates drew contributions from nearly 200 peers, split between support, opposition and conditional approval
Alistair Mills of Landmark Chambers reflects on the Human Rights Act 1998 a quarter-century after it came into force, in this week's issue of NLJ
In his latest Civil Way column for NLJ, Stephen Gold surveys a raft of procedural changes and quirky disputes shaping civil practice. His message is clear: civil practitioners must brace for continual tweaks, unexpected contentions and rising costs in everyday litigation
Barbara Mills KC, chair of the Bar 2025 and joint head of chambers at 4PB, sets out in this week's NLJ how the profession will respond to Baroness Harriet Harman KC’s review into bullying, harassment and sexual misconduct at the Bar
back-to-top-scroll