" Rattling Around Like A Bat In A...
Phrases & Sayings12 mins ago
Court Of Appeal
12 Answers
I have attended a civil court hearing as the Defendant.
It was a motoring accident involving my vehicle and the Claimant's.
The Claimant was suing me for repair costs to his vehicle, hire costs for a replacement vehicle, and Personal Injury.
The Claimant was insured 3rd Party Fire & Theft and was using an Accident Management Company to pursue the claim.
I was insured Fully Comp with projected NCD and had taken out Legal Protection.
Both parties were legally represented in court.
The Judge came to the conclusion that the Claimant was liable for causing the collision.
The Claimant's Barrister immediately asked for Permission to Appeal, but I don't know on what grounds, other than he didn't agree with the Judge's decision.
Assuming that Permission to Appeal is granted:
When will I be notified that the Appeal has been accepted?
Would I be notified if Permission were not granted?
If the Appeal has to go to an oral hearing first, would I be notified of the date and time? If not, how can I ensure that I know it is taking place?
Will the hearing be along the same lines as the first hearing?
(We were in a court room, and we gave our evidence in the witness stand, under oath.)
Will the entire hearing take place again, as before?
Unfortunately, my solicitors had let me down by not submitting a lot of evidence which I had collated myself, and which I had intended to refer to in court.
Will I be allowed to use evidence at the Appeal Hearing which was not submitted at the first hearing.
Can my independent witness be ordered to attend an Appeal?
(She decided not to turn up for the first hearing.)
My Barrister is going to write a complaint to the solicitors for not submitting my own evidence, which was relevant and well presented.
Can I insist that a qualified solicitor helps me to prepare for the hearing next time, rather than the Fee-earner? I would want to meet with my solicitor beforehand to see what papers are being submitted to the court. Would that be a reasonable request?
All help will be gratefully received. Thank you.
It was a motoring accident involving my vehicle and the Claimant's.
The Claimant was suing me for repair costs to his vehicle, hire costs for a replacement vehicle, and Personal Injury.
The Claimant was insured 3rd Party Fire & Theft and was using an Accident Management Company to pursue the claim.
I was insured Fully Comp with projected NCD and had taken out Legal Protection.
Both parties were legally represented in court.
The Judge came to the conclusion that the Claimant was liable for causing the collision.
The Claimant's Barrister immediately asked for Permission to Appeal, but I don't know on what grounds, other than he didn't agree with the Judge's decision.
Assuming that Permission to Appeal is granted:
When will I be notified that the Appeal has been accepted?
Would I be notified if Permission were not granted?
If the Appeal has to go to an oral hearing first, would I be notified of the date and time? If not, how can I ensure that I know it is taking place?
Will the hearing be along the same lines as the first hearing?
(We were in a court room, and we gave our evidence in the witness stand, under oath.)
Will the entire hearing take place again, as before?
Unfortunately, my solicitors had let me down by not submitting a lot of evidence which I had collated myself, and which I had intended to refer to in court.
Will I be allowed to use evidence at the Appeal Hearing which was not submitted at the first hearing.
Can my independent witness be ordered to attend an Appeal?
(She decided not to turn up for the first hearing.)
My Barrister is going to write a complaint to the solicitors for not submitting my own evidence, which was relevant and well presented.
Can I insist that a qualified solicitor helps me to prepare for the hearing next time, rather than the Fee-earner? I would want to meet with my solicitor beforehand to see what papers are being submitted to the court. Would that be a reasonable request?
All help will be gratefully received. Thank you.
Answers
1 to 12 of 12
Relax.....
14:50 Sat 10th Jun 2017
Um hi
this doesnt usually go down this route and so we would only be able to answer generally.
You sit back and enjoy it - as the main principle here is subrogation and is explained here
https:/
dates from a common law case 1828 I think ( Preston v Someone)
read the article - you have been paid off and so you have no rights
and that answers most of the questions in the paragraph
Assuming perission to appeal is granted....
I have just read a case on addition of evidence
and whether an appeal case is just another run of the first 100m dash - and the general principle is that it is an appeal on Law
there are rules on admission of evidence AFTER in the first case the judge says "OK that is it - anything else either of you?"
and - or in the appeal court
generally you have to persuade the judge of a good reason it was not admitted the first time round ( like no one knew about it - doesnt apply here) - and my lawyer ( in your case one of my lawyers) was a twit does NOT apply
The principle here is deeble deeble deeble finis ad litem
[ or as Judge Judy would say - ya godda call a halt to legal cases somewhere or else we would do nothing else - get outta here!]
The priciple of "there has to be an end of this [somewhere]" is also present in the idea of res judicata ( the thing decided - if you are always 'at it' then nothing is ever decided )
sorry I havent had breakfast
so will it all be played out again ?
no only on certain grounds that the barrister should have said at hte original hearing....
No you have lost your independent witness
a pity but not surprising she didnt turn up "oops I am sorry I am SO late " is NOT accepted see principles above
If she turned up then the transcript of her oral evidence would be preferred to a second go
Last para is covered by the principle of subrogation and you cannot, having been paid off insist on anything at all.....
The reason why you have been 'confused' is that none of the lawyers wanted to say 'shut up ! it is none of YOUR business now WHAT we do...'
wander around this site
I think we have had - under what circs can I add evidence at the end of a case....
No guarantees about the quality of this advice
as divebuddy once wrote
if you believe his advice on anything at all
you are crazy
( good exclusion statement huh ?)
if you gonna read about this
any starter book on Insurance Law ( something like Principles of Insurance Law) and a book on civil procedure ( which I can guarantee is terribly boring) is a good start
and it sounds as tho you have time on your hands
this doesnt usually go down this route and so we would only be able to answer generally.
You sit back and enjoy it - as the main principle here is subrogation and is explained here
https:/
dates from a common law case 1828 I think ( Preston v Someone)
read the article - you have been paid off and so you have no rights
and that answers most of the questions in the paragraph
Assuming perission to appeal is granted....
I have just read a case on addition of evidence
and whether an appeal case is just another run of the first 100m dash - and the general principle is that it is an appeal on Law
there are rules on admission of evidence AFTER in the first case the judge says "OK that is it - anything else either of you?"
and - or in the appeal court
generally you have to persuade the judge of a good reason it was not admitted the first time round ( like no one knew about it - doesnt apply here) - and my lawyer ( in your case one of my lawyers) was a twit does NOT apply
The principle here is deeble deeble deeble finis ad litem
[ or as Judge Judy would say - ya godda call a halt to legal cases somewhere or else we would do nothing else - get outta here!]
The priciple of "there has to be an end of this [somewhere]" is also present in the idea of res judicata ( the thing decided - if you are always 'at it' then nothing is ever decided )
sorry I havent had breakfast
so will it all be played out again ?
no only on certain grounds that the barrister should have said at hte original hearing....
No you have lost your independent witness
a pity but not surprising she didnt turn up "oops I am sorry I am SO late " is NOT accepted see principles above
If she turned up then the transcript of her oral evidence would be preferred to a second go
Last para is covered by the principle of subrogation and you cannot, having been paid off insist on anything at all.....
The reason why you have been 'confused' is that none of the lawyers wanted to say 'shut up ! it is none of YOUR business now WHAT we do...'
wander around this site
I think we have had - under what circs can I add evidence at the end of a case....
No guarantees about the quality of this advice
as divebuddy once wrote
if you believe his advice on anything at all
you are crazy
( good exclusion statement huh ?)
if you gonna read about this
any starter book on Insurance Law ( something like Principles of Insurance Law) and a book on civil procedure ( which I can guarantee is terribly boring) is a good start
and it sounds as tho you have time on your hands
new evidence appeals
review here
https:/
Bailli.org is the easy to use online law library ( free )
review here
https:/
Bailli.org is the easy to use online law library ( free )
Relax.....there is nothing you can do, write, say or have witness appear at the next hearing. Trust me you have no grounds for another hearing.....and good news you can't....leave the lawyers to fight out the next stage which doesn't involve you in any way. Its an insurance law case between the two sets of lawyers.....you won't even be invited to the next hearing. With regard to your complaint...it will get a reply from the solicitors' practice "complaints manager"...brace yourself...they nearly always say "we were in the right".....when you get their reply complain to the Law Society....and ask your Barrister for a copy of his letter as evidence of poor service
//Trust me you have no grounds for another hearing....//
Just to clarify: It is the Clamant's Barrister who have asked for permission to appeal.
Because liability was not split, the other party solicitors will not have their costs paid. I assume they will appeal for split liability.
I know that the solicitors who were appointed by my insurance company now have to make a claim for their costs, and of course I will not be involved in this process.
Just to clarify: It is the Clamant's Barrister who have asked for permission to appeal.
Because liability was not split, the other party solicitors will not have their costs paid. I assume they will appeal for split liability.
I know that the solicitors who were appointed by my insurance company now have to make a claim for their costs, and of course I will not be involved in this process.
The Fee Earner called me earlier this week. He said that he had logged my complaint on the system and had also forwarded it to my insurance company.
He asked what he could do to resolve this problem. I explained that all I had wanted was a phone call from him after the Hearing. He did apologise for not getting in touch: that is good enough for me.
He asked what he could do to resolve this problem. I explained that all I had wanted was a phone call from him after the Hearing. He did apologise for not getting in touch: that is good enough for me.
1 to 12 of 12
