Report comment

It remains to be seen if it will actually work in practice but where a claim is struck out for want of a fee that has clearly been paid (or not taken when a PBA account number has been given and the Court invited to take the fee), try an immediate application under the slip rule (CPR 40.12 and PD 40B Paragraph 4).

It's free, can be made by e-mail or other informal document and chased immediately by telephone. I have had it work before on similar such obvious errors by the Court (such as a default judgment being entered in spite of an AoS having been e-filed and an automatic receipt e-mail sent to confirm receipt). I even got that rarest of things - an apology!

It was explained to me that the Court was working with an 8 day backlog. The AoS was in the backlog and had not been associated with the file when the Court came to consider whether Judgment should be entered for want of acknowledgment... I anticipate similar such silliness will happen with cheques or letters inviting the Court to take payment from a PBA account number.

I wouldn't wait long for a response without following up with a full application mind if it didn't prompt an immediate response in spite of chasing!

I have grave misgivings however that the Court will simply find it impossible to deal in time with an application to reinstate, necessarily made less than 28 days prior to the hearing, thus losing the original hearing date. If the Courts cannot get their house in order, I suspect a percentage of all claims will now be struck out, vacated, reinstated and then relisted at least once before finally coming before the Court proper. What a waist of administrative effort.