header-logo header-logo

09 September 2016
Issue: 7713 / Categories: Case law , Judicial line , In Court
printer mail-detail

The race is on

If a defendant is late in filing their defence to a CPR Pt 7 claim but before the claimant has requested a default judgment, does the defendant require an extension of time from the court in order to fend off a subsequent default judgment request?

A late defence will beat a request for judgment in default of defence. Provided the defendant gets in first with the filing of their defence, they will not be prejudiced by being out of time. The better view is that CPR 15.5 which describes the period it specifies for the filing of a defence as the “general rule” does not require the court’s relief from sanction under CPR 3.9 where the defence is late. However, it would be wise for a defendant who is or will be out of time time to apply to the court for an extension so as to head off a default judgment which would necessitate an application to have it set aside but they would have to show that their defence was bona fide

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

NLJ Career Profile: Stephen Ward, The Barrister Group

NLJ Career Profile: Stephen Ward, The Barrister Group

From mowing lawns to life at the Bar: Stephen Ward reflects on an unconventional career

Clarke Willmott—Ben Loosemore

Clarke Willmott—Ben Loosemore

Commercial property partner joins Clarke Willmott in Southampton

Ellisons—Robert Tiffen

Ellisons—Robert Tiffen

Robert Tiffen joins Ellisons as Partner in growing Norwich office

NEWS
The Law Society RFC Festival of Sport returns next month, bringing together legal and financial services professionals for one of the sector’s largest annual sporting events
Legal aid deserts leave almost one in four without adequate access to justice
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners

Jonathan Fisher KC highlights that it now accounts for around 40% of criminal offences, with roughly 70% involving technology, and argues that the UK cannot simply prosecute its way out of the problem. Detection, investigation and prosecution all require improvement, while different fraud types demand tailored responses.

back-to-top-scroll