header-logo header-logo

27 January 2011
Issue: 7450 / Categories: Case law , Judicial line
printer mail-detail

Judgment registration in contested case

A judgment arising out of a contested county court hearing is not registrable at the Register of County Court Judgments...

A judgment arising out of a contested county court hearing is not registrable at the Register of County Court Judgments etc—at least initially—if the claim was contested. Does this still apply if the defendant did not turn up at the trial which led to the judgment although he had filed a defence and otherwise participated in the proceedings?

Yes, it does. The filing of the defence would have rendered the claim contested for the purposes of the Register of Judgments, Orders and Fines Regulations 2005 (SI 2005/3595). The defendant’s absence from the trial does not convert the claim into an uncontested case. After all, the court might dismiss the claim on a one-sided hearing even in the defendant’s absence if the claimant’s case has not been proved to its satisfaction. It is not unknown for a defendant to file an unmeritorious defence with the sole object of prolonging registration of a judgment until enforcement

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll