Report comment

Please fill in the form to report an unsuitable comment. Please state which comment is of concern and why. It will be sent to our moderator for review.

Comment

Michael Goode at 5.48pm

I have certainly not lost a case to a MF, even a struck-off solicitor MF who tried to persuade a DDJ that he had rights of audience and that the reason why in an application to set-aside a defence made in default, a defendant had not filed a draft defence in support of his application despite being ordered to do so several times over several adjournments, was that he had not read the various orders properly so had not prepared the draft defence - therefore it wasn't his client's fault so the application should succeed. Yeah right!!

The result was that the application was dismissed and the £2k Judgment became almost £10k when costs were added so he achieved a great result for his 'client'.

I think the point that the various posts are making is that MF do not just act as support for LiPs. They conduct litigation or "manage cases" as you describe it and attempt to conduct advocacy despite not having rights of audience!

You say that there is a market for MFs because LiPs cannot afford high street fees but:

a) Solicitors conduct litigation and advocacy and are paid at the rates set by the court for doing that - they do not simply "support" LiPs. How therefore can you compare what they charge for doing with what MFs charge for doing?

b) You say that MFs only provide support and do not conduct advocacy or "manage cases" so how is it there is a market for the services of MFs if they do not do what LiPs cannot afford to pay solicitors to do?

You ably demonstrate that cases are won not just on the facts but, in a court system with a declining standard of judges hearing cases in unfamiliar areas of law to what they practised, on the way that the facts and evidence are structured, presented and supported by the relevant law.

Your details

Cancel