Difference between revisions of "Stay Hearing: Court Bundle"
Line 63: | Line 63: | ||
You can argue that it is not authorititave since the issue of Human Rights was not argued the appeal was against costs not against the imposition of a stay and therefore the point was not fully argued. No definitive statement of the law can emerge. | You can argue that it is not authorititave since the issue of Human Rights was not argued the appeal was against costs not against the imposition of a stay and therefore the point was not fully argued. No definitive statement of the law can emerge. | ||
+ | |||
+ | [[Category:Bank_Charges]] | ||
+ | |||
+ | [[Category:Legal_Information]] |
Latest revision as of 21:38, 18 November 2007
Bundle for Stay Hearing
Your bundle will need to be indexed and paginated. Follow court Directions as to submission. If no Directions are given, try to get your bundle to the court and a copy to the Defendant at least 7 days before the hearing.
1. Copy of skeleton argument (adapt for your circumstances)
Stay Hearing: Skeleton Argument
2. Witness statement: (adapt for your own purposes)
Application for Removal of Stay: Updated
3. Copy of your application for removal or objection letter.
4. Copy of all correspondence.
5. List of settled cases for the defendant
6. Copy of Human Rights Act 1998:
7. Copy of the Overriding Objectives of the Civil Procedure Rules:
8. Copy of OFT Particulars of Claim:
9.Copy of BBC News article by Ian Pollock:
BBC NEWS | Business | OFT may compromise on bank case
10. Copy of article by Uswitch:
http://www.uswitch.com/Press-Room/In...UT-IN-THE-COLD
If you are relying on hardship include the following:
(Remember hardship is a matter of fact to be proved. It is not limited to those on benefits, although those in receipt of benefits who are currently having charges applied to their benefits will have a strong case of hardship.)
11. Copy of FSA waiver:
12. Budget sheet showing income and expenditure.
13. Any other evidence of hardship eg outstanding debts, missed mortgage payments.
If the Defendant raises the case of Wilson v Robertson add this to your bundle (HSBC have used this)
Wilson v Robertsons (London) Ltd [2002 EWCA Civ 622 (16 January 2002)]
You can argue that it is not authorititave since the issue of Human Rights was not argued the appeal was against costs not against the imposition of a stay and therefore the point was not fully argued. No definitive statement of the law can emerge.