Key Facts
- •Mr. Owen (A) brought a small claim against Black Horse Limited (R) under the Consumer Credit Act 1974.
- •A's claim alleged unfair treatment due to undisclosed payments received by R from an insurer.
- •A's solicitor attended the hearing, but A did not.
- •The District Judge struck out A's claim for non-attendance.
- •The Judge upheld the District Judge's decision.
- •The appeal concerns the interpretation of CPR 27.9(2)(a) regarding 'non-attendance' at a small claims hearing.
Legal Principles
Interpretation of CPR 27.9 regarding non-attendance at small claims hearings.
Civil Procedure Rules (CPR), Part 27.9
Interpretation of CPR 39.3 regarding non-attendance at trials.
Civil Procedure Rules (CPR), Part 39.3
The right of a party to be represented by a legal representative.
Civil Procedure Rules (CPR), implicitly through Part 27 and Part 39
Overriding objective of the Civil Procedure Rules to deal with cases justly.
Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) implicitly
Outcomes
Appeal allowed.
The Court of Appeal held that 'non-attendance' in CPR 27.9(2)(a) does not require the claimant's personal presence if represented by a solicitor. The court emphasized the need for consistent interpretation across different CPR parts and the practical incoherence of the alternative interpretation.