A court action had become stale, and was at risk of automatic striking out. One party wrote the court requesting directions or that the judge direct a case management conference if appropriate. He did not seek the approval of the defendant. It was held that the letter, and its being read by the judge, was not sufficient of itself to sound an assertion that the proceedings had come before the court on paper. The letter fell short of a notice of application and the judge’s response was not an exercise of his powers under the rules. The claim was automatically struck out. The phrase ‘coming before a judge . . on paper’ had to mean that the judge also considered the exercise of his powers under the Rules.
Citations:
Gazette 25-Jan-2001, Times 31-Jan-2001, [2000] EWCA Civ 304
Links:
Statutes:
Civil Procedure Rules Part 23 Rule 3.3
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Civil Procedure Rules
Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147337