|
Having viewed this thread and another similar, I was wondering what the outcome was for loops (success I hope). My firm took an ex-client to Court earlier this year and I read with interest the comments made by moyo, as my experience was somewhat removed from the account given by moyo - though I do appreciate court procedures may have moved on.
I think it would be valuable for Members in Practice to recount my experience here, as the Court "service" hasn't filled me with a great deal of confidence in the "Justice" system.
The court appointent was set, but when we turned up on the relevant morning we were told we could be waiting a number of hours because the judge (who the case had been listed with) was sitting another case. We were told that the court double books cases, in case parties don't turn up. In the event we were seen by another judge who initially tried to conduct some mediation I informed him (as was evidently unaware) that the court had previously passed our case for mediation before and we were unable to reach agreement.
That established, the judge then went on to talk about adverse costs (in the small claims??!!) and, get this, the ex-client had hired a barrister who would have cost a muliple of the unpaid fee we were seeking to recover! The judged suggested (what was quite obviously a 'finger in the air') settlement figure and we were released over lunchtime with a very strong inference that we were expected to come back having reached a settlement.
We reached a settlement over the lunch period and returned to see the same judge who signed off, what I understand is called, a Tomlin agreement. He then addressed me, saying (something along the lines of): "it's not for me to give advice, but I suggest these things are better dealt with over a cup of coffee and a croissant". I pointed out that I had made numerous attempts to reach settlement before the matter ended up in court.
It has since dawned on me that the judge directing the hearing to matters of mediation and adverse costs, was a misdirection from the fact that he had not given the case papers any more than a cursory glance and was not wanting to look any other than omnipotent. I believe had we been in front of someone who had throughly equipped themselves with facts, the matter would, indeed, have been over with in half an hour, and in our favour.
I'm very interested in other members experiences as if there is some commonality, I think we should do something about this. I've noticed how this, and other similar posts have gone quiet and it intrigues me.
Edited at 16 Oct 2016 08:22 PM GMT
Edited at 17 Oct 2016 06:45 AM GMT
|
