Freely Available British and Irish Public Legal Information
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
Jersey Unreported Judgments
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Jersey Unreported Judgments >> Michael Voisin and Co v Wain [2000] JRC 54 (29 March 2000)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/je/cases/UR/2000/2000_54.html
Cite as: [2000] JRC 54
[New search] [Help]
2000/54
1 page
ROYAL COURT.
(Samedi Division)
29th March, 2000.
Before: Sir Philip Bailhache, Bailiff,
and Jurats Le Ruez and Georgelin.
|
Between |
Michael Matthew Godfray Voisin, Ian Walter Stanley Strang, John Philip Kendall, and Ashley David Hoy, exercising the profession of Advocates and Solicitor, under the name and style of 'Michael Voisin and Co.', and the aforementioned as Assignees of John Gerald Patrick Wheeler and David John Petit
|
Plaintiffs |
|
And |
Leslie Wain
|
Defendant |
IN THE MATTER OF
an application by the Plaintiffs for an Order for the payment by the Defendant of an account rendered for professional services.
Reasoned Judgment by the Court for its Decision to adjourn the hearing in the light of the Plaintiff's failure to file a skeletal argument in accordance with the provisions of Practice Direction 99/15.
Advocate A.J.D. Winchester for the Plaintiffs.
The Defendant on his own behalf.
JUDGMENT
THE BAILIFF: Mr Winchester, the Court does not find that this is a satisfactory state of affairs. The Court has issued a Practice Direction and the Court expects that Practice Direction to be complied with. It is not acceptable for counsel to come to this Court and to say that, for his own reasons, he has decided not to comply with the Practice Direction and that the issues will reveal themselves in due course. The purpose of the Practice Direction is to ensure that the issues are made clear to the Court before the hearing, so that the Court is in a position to determine what is relevant and in a case such as this where there is a litigant in person, to guide the litigant in person.
The Court is going to adjourn the matter. The Court will order that the costs wasted by this hearing will be paid by the plaintiffs, Michael Voisin and Co., and the Court expects that the case will be relisted with documents properly prepared in accordance with the Practice Direction in short order.
NO AUTHORITIES