Successful Application To Strike Out Claim

T V M: Successful Application to Strike Out Claim Due to Non-Compliance with CPR PD 32
Background

Our firm was instructed by a landlord defendant in a housing disrepair matter. Initially, the defendant was acting in person and failed to file a defence, resulting in a judgment against him.

Upon our instruction, we successfully applied to set aside the judgment, ensuring compliance with subsequent court deadlines.

The Issue

During our review of the case, we discovered that the claimant, a Turkish national with limited English proficiency, had her trial witness statement drafted in English. This violated Civil Procedure Rules Practice Direction 32 (CPR PD 32), which mandates that witness statements should be in the witness’s own words and language (CPR PD 32, para 18.1). Furthermore, the required process of translating the statement, which includes certification of accuracy and filing both the translated and original statements (CPR PD 32, para 23.2), was not followed.

Procedural Actions

1. Notification and Unless Order: At a hearing, we brought the Issue to the court’s attention and with detailed explanation as to Claimant’s non-compliance. As a result, the court issued an unless order requiring the claimant to submit a witness statement in compliance with CPR PD32. Failure to do so would result in her being debarred from relying on her statement.
   
2. Non-Compliance: The claimant submitted two statements (in Turkish and English) that still did not meet the requirements of the unless order and CPR PD 32.
   
3. Enforcement and Strike-Out Application: We applied to enforce the unless order. The court’s decision in our favour led to the claimant being unable to present her witness evidence. As a result, her claim could not be substantiated through cross-examination if proceeded to trial, leading us to successfully request the court to strike out her case.
   

Outcome

The court struck out the claimant’s case due to her failure to comply with the unless order and CPR PD 32. The defendant was awarded approximately 85% of his legal costs as budgeted. Additionally, the time and expenses of attending the trial were avoided.

Key Lessons and Reminders

1. Compliance with CPR PD 32: Ensuring witness statements for the trial are in the witness’s own words and language is crucial. Proper translation and certification processes must be followed.
   
2. Court Orders and Deadlines: Strict adherence to court orders and deadlines is essential. Non-compliance can lead to severe consequences, including dismissal of the case.
   
3. Overriding Objectives: Respecting the court’s time and resources by complying with procedural rules aligns with the CPR’s overriding objectives to handle cases justly and efficiently.
   

Conclusion

This case underscores the importance of adhering to procedural rules and court orders. Compliance ensures a fair opportunity to present evidence and respects the judicial process, while repeated failures can result in the striking out of claims and significant cost implications.