County Court Rules - 1998

The case shown here are derived from the lawindexpro case law database. lawindexpro is a low cost case law database, with over 260,000 case listings, and over 200,000 links to full text judgments. The free service below shows the core information on the case, but is restricted in several ways. A small proportion of cases do allow access to the full lawindexpro information. These cases are selected at random, and may be different on your next visit. The active links through to lawindexpro are extremely powerful allowing full access to all linked cases.  

This page lists 14 cases, and was prepared on 28 October 2012.

Christine Figgett -v- David Charles Edwin Davis [1998] EWCA Civ 113
30 Jan 1998 CA	County Court Rules
	An order striking out a defence and requiring fully argued directions to be filed left the action without directions; no automatic directions could apply.
	County Court Rules 1981 Order 17 Rule 11
	Link[s] omitted

Limb -v- Union Jack Removals Let and Another; Mcgivern -v- Brown; Partington -v- Turners Bakery; Pyne Edwards -v- Moore Large & Co Ltd
17 Feb 1998 CA	County Court Rules
	An admission of fault, without acceptance of liability, was not enough to be an admission which could set the 12 month strike out clock running.
	County Court Rules 1981 Order 9 Rule 10(I)

Gilham -v- Browning and Another
26 Feb 1998 CA	County Court Rules
	The Court had been right to disallow a discontinuance where abuse of process. The common law right to non-suit has disappeared.
	County Court Rules 1981 Order 18

Theaker And Another -v- Going Places Travel Limited CA Civ 573
31 Mar 1998 CA	County Court Rules	Casemap 1 Cites
	The appellants had booked a holiday, relying upon the brochure produced by the respondents. On the date of the hearing, the plaintiffs arrived early. They claimed to have told the representative of the defendant that they would leave but return before the expected hearing time. They came back early, but the case had come on, and their case had been dismissed. The defendant gave a differing story. Held: The court had a discretion before ordering re-instatement to consider the merits of the claim. Here, the misrepresentation alleged was not sustainable, and in view also of the small amount, leave to re-instate the case was denied.
	Package Travel Package Holidays and Package Tours Regulations 1992 (1992 No 3288)
	Link[s] omitted

Stephen Haiselden -v- P and O Properties Limited [1998] EWCH Civ 773
5 May 1998 CA	Personal Injury, County Court Rules
	[ Bailii ]

Maryland Estates Ltd -v- Joseph and Another [1998] EWCA Civ 693; [1999] 1 WLR 83; [1998] 3 All ER 193
6 May 1998 CA Beldam LJ, Bracewell LJ	Landlord and Tenant, County Court Rules
	A claim for rent arrears in County Court, was also to be read to include a claim for arrears (mesne profits) arising after the issue of the summons for possession and rent. The landlord will be entitled if relief from forfeiture is granted to all his arrears of rent and the rent until the date of the hearing.
	County Courts Act 1984 138(3)
	[ Bailii ]

Susan Joy Cockeril -v- Tambrands Limited and the Two Other Appeals Listed In the Schedule [1998] EWCA Civ 882
21 May 1998 CA	County Court Rules	Casemap 1 Cites
	Even if ca ase is quite unsuitable for automatic directions, the plaintiff has an obligation to apply instead for specific manual directions to stand in their stead. It would be wrong to allow a plaintiff to escape from the discipline of the automatic directions timetable simply by issuing an application seeking an order that the timetable be disapplied.
	County Court Rules 1981 17.11
	Link[s] omitted

Haiselden -v- P & O Properties Ltd
28 May 1998 CA	County Court Rules
	Where one party was a litigant in person and the other was legally represented, the legal advisers had a duty to inform the court and the other party where a patent mistake had been made. Small claim referred to full hearing not arbitration. Where claim for 1000 by LIP was mistakenly tried rather than arbitrated as a small claim, the award of costs against plaintiff should be set aside. It was wrong of a legally assisted party to take advantage.

Prolaw Ld -v- Adams (T/A Nigel Adams & Co)
4 Jun 1998 CA	County Court Rules
	Automatically struck out case can continue until the order in that behalf and after successful appeal by virtue of manual directions instead of automatic timetable etc.
	County Court Rules 1981 Order 17 Rule

Jackson and Others -v- Pinchbeck and Others
4 Jun 1998 CA	County Court Rules
	When case staid for non-prosecution, a defence delivered during the stay did not become delivered upon the lifting of the stay. Defendant could still argue that action struck out automatically.
	County Court Rules 1981 Order 17 Rule 11

Curi -v- Colina
14 Oct 1998 CA	Personal Injury, County Court Rules	Casemap 1 Cites
	Chance of 'serious … disease or deterioration' must be measurable risk rather than merely fanciful. There must be a possibility of deterioration, but there is no need to show more than a possibility.
	County Courts Act 1984 51

Regina -v- London Borough of Hillingdon ex parte McDonagh [1998] EWHC Admin 1015
28 Oct 1998 Admn	Land, County Court Rules, Housing
	A Local Authority seeking possession under CCR Ord. 24 of land which was occupied by gypsies, had no duty to make enquiries about their housing status. The Department of Environment circular stated only what was good practice, not what was the necessary practice.
	County Court Rules 1981 Order 24 - Gipsy Sites and Unauthorised Camping (Department of Environment 18/24)
	Link[s] omitted

Bogdan Gesek -v- Estate of Tusnelda Maria Giller (Deceased) [1998] EWCA Civ 1765; [1998] EWCA Civ 1765
13 Nov 1998 CA Lady Justice Butler-Sloss, Lord Justice Buxton	Wills and Probate, County Court Rules
	The plaintiff sought damages from the estate. The appointed defendant had not taken out a grant of probate. There was confusion about the terms of an order made authorising the representation. Held: The judge did have discretion to make an order for representation in respect of future proceedings. In not exercising his discretion to extend the time for service, he had failed to give effect to the purpose of the rule, namely to ensure that all issues between the parties are decided. The appeal against the dismissal of the action in limine was successful.
	County Court Rules 1981 Ord 5 Rule 8
	Link[s] omitted

Manchester City Council -v- Cochrane and Cochrane [1998] EWCA Civ 1967; (1999) 31 HLR 810; [1999] 1 WLR 809
21 Dec 1998 CA Lord Justice Auld, Lord Justice Judge, Sir John Knox	Housing, County Court Rules, Judicial Review	Casemap 1 Cites
	The tenants held an introductory tenancy under the Act. The council sought possession, after giving notice, and after its review under the Act. The tenants objected, but the Council denied the right of the County Court to hear the objection, arguing that the court had no discretion but to order possession, that the right to appeal review was not a private law right, and the County Court had no jurisdiction in judicial review. Held: The Council's appeal was allowed. The right under an introductory tenancy was only to remain into possession until and unless a possession order was made. An introductory tenant could not raise a defence to a claim for possession when that defence was based on the contentions that (a) there had been no breaches of the tenancy agreement (the substantive ground relied on by the Council for bringing the instant proceedings), (b) the relevant Regulations had not been complied with, and (c) there had been a failure to comply with the rules of natural justice in the conduct of the review by the Panel. To hold otherwise would defeat the purpose of the legislation.
	Housing Act 1996 Part V 125(1) 127 128 - Housing Act 1996 125(1) - Introductory Tenants (Review) Regulations 1997 - County Court Act 1984 38(3)
	Link[s] omitted