Owen (claimant/appellant) v Black Horse Ltd (defendant/respondent)
Tuesday 31 January 2023
By Appellant’s Notice filed on the 1 August 2022, the appellant appeals the order of His Honour Judge Jarman KC dated 12 July 2022. The issue is; where a Claimant (C) is not personally present at trial, but a representative appears on his behalf, does that C attend the trial for purpose of CPR 27.9(2)(a) or is the position that the C does not attend the trial ,so that the Court has a discretion to strike out the claim?
In this case the C was not present at trial but his solicitors appeared on his behalf. The Courts below (Deputy DJ Sandercock and on appeal HHJ Jarman KC) held that C had not attended the trial with result that, in absence of a proper notice having been filed in accordance with CPR 27.9(1), the Court had a discretion to strike out the claim.
The C submits that the opposite view has been taken in the High Court interpreting the same words; CPR 39.3(1)(b) when dealing with trials on the fast track and multi-track.
C submits that he did attend the trial through his legal representative, with result that the Court did not have jurisdiction to strike out the claim under CPR 27.9(2).