Credit Union Loan and Court today. How I got on

C

cavan1212

Guest
(Moderator note: moved from another thread)
I must say I have found this tread very useful, and has some what put my nerves at ease..
I am due in court in the morning, my first step in facing up to my debt as I can not hide/bury my head in the sand hoping it will just go away.

I have completed the statement of means and attached a personal budget and lodged it with the court last week.
.
My wife and I are both on social welfare and have a recently new born son (5 months) we also do not own a house and are currently renting (with rent allowence) however we are currently constanly broke from week to week.
We do not drink nor socialise ie go out for meals/pubs etc, once a month we'd go the cinema or lunch in the local pub as our treat.

I am being realistic the an installment order of €10 a week would drastically effect our lifes. €10 may not seem a lot to some people but when you have to count 1cents, and 5cents on a Monday to get a bottle of milk or a sliced pan, a tenner is a lot of money. So I am hoping that the judge is understanding and does not impose an order which i can not pay back.

I have dug my head in the sand the past year or 2 but am now hoping to face up to this debt and others which I will be contacting after court tomorrow.

The amount owed is €6134.64 plus €327.75 cost and expenses dated 22nd April 2010 HOWEVER i received a letted dated 7 September 2010 stating amount due €6506.79 with interest of €141.18 @8% from May to September total amount €6647.97.

I remember reading on other threads that the district court deals with amount less than €6k odd, I can not remember exact figor but I think it was €6350, will this mean tomorrows case will be passed on to the other court??

thanks in advance for any information/advice
 
Just to follow up,

What an awful experience, firstly when my name was called I stood up and made my way to the witness box, about 5 feet away from it I stood, the banks sol and judge spoke in a lanuage i did not understand about advodaviate and lodgements, I was left standing like a fool. The judge then asked was I here, I said yes, he then went on to question me where I was stood, in the middle of the court, not in the witness box. When I tried to explain certain things he spoke over me moving on to his next question or point. He was in no way sympatecic. He would not look at my documents I brought to court, balance sheet, letters from other solicitores and companies I owe money to.
He lectured me and the court on the state of the social welfare system saying that we pay too much and said if I crossed the boarder its only £60 a month.

He wouldnt let me explain that i also had other debts arising to a hell of a lot more than this one and asked how much i could pay back weekly. I said between 10-15 possible 20 euro a week max and he said NO. He ordered for me to pay 25euro a week.

I then asked could the interest be frozzen as and from today, and he said that because I had previously worked in banking that I shouldnt be asking him that question and that I should know the answer and to contact the bank myself.

He ordered 100 be paid monthly, I then said that I honestly would not be able to keep up this amount if i was to face up to other debts that I want to sort out. He just said, that is the amount order and that I have to pay it.

He did knock off the costs ( I think) and mumbled a load of other stuff which I have no idea what he siad.

Furthermore I have no idea who I am supposed to pay this money too, how i am supposed to pay it and when I have to start paying it, I was just left to walk out of the court none the wiser as to what was going on.

Overall I wished I had never gone today and just continued to ignore all post that comes through the door !!!
 
Hi Cavan

Sorry to hear that.

I don't think it's typical. Most judges are more sympathetic to the borrower who shows up.

Despite the terrible experience, you did the right thing showing up. If you hadn't , he would have given a bigger order against you.

Brendan
 
Cavan that sounds awful and what a terrible way to treat you.

For him to order you to pay something you can't afford makes absolutely no sense to me whatsoever.
 
In situations such as what Cavin has just experienced in the court system, is there any recourse for the person to go back and get someone to explain the outcome of the case in plain language?
 
He lectured me and the court on the state of the social welfare system saying that we pay too much and said if I crossed the boarder its only £60 a month.


It was none of the judge's business to lecture you on the Irish Welfare system and although it may be less across the border, it is a different country and jurisdiction and alot of other variables come into play.:(
 
Cavan

Did you speak with MABS?

If you struggle with the instalment order, you can apply for a variation.

Brendan
 
Hi cavan1212

I am waiting to get a letter for a court date and am wondering where you went to court? How long was the process etc. I also think the judge should be accountable for his ignorance and disrespect just like any other citizin in a job. He has a job to do and its not to treat people like he was some dictator and we were scum. I really hope you get sorted?
 
@ Brendan, I haven't as of yet contacted MABS, but I am gathering all my documentation of monies owed and bills and hope to drop into my local office in the next week or two, when I know the total amount of what I owe.

Thanks for the information on the "variation" I was not aware of what I could do next, I have google searched trying to find out but to no success. I will google variation now and read up on it.

thanks
 
@ Tessi, I recieved a letter dated 01/06/10, ENFORCEMENT OF COURT ORDERS ACT 1926, SUMMONS FOR ATTENDANCE OF DEBTOR. stating that I was to attend court on todays date. This was delivered to me in person by a person who said he was the District Court Clerk, I was caught unawares and did not actually ask for identification, so I am just taking it for granted that it was indeed the clerk.

The court process was as follows:

Summons stated court starts at 10.30am

I arrived 10.15

I was told by clerk who called to house to ask the court clerk what time roughly I would be called so that if it was after lunch I could head off for a while. The clerk was no where to be seen. I seen a local guard and asked him where she would be he went and checked and said she's probably making tea, he asked me was it a charge or a summons I was here for, I said summons and he said it will probably be after lunch as he does the charges first.

11.25 the judge appears from his chambers

He starts on the summons first, 2-3 strikeouts, an unemployed man oweing more than my amount was asked how much he could pay he said €100 a month, judge ordered €175 a month. This man had a totally household income of only €300 odd a week to the best of my knowledge.

I was then called, my story above and the whole process last no longer than 5-7 mins although to me it felt more like 30 mins..

Best of luck with your issues, if you wish to PM me I will be more than happy to help or answer more questions
 
I'd like to also add that the whole proceedure was humiliating. I have never been to a court or have not had any dealings with the guards other than the standard dealings like road checkpoints etc. I think that be seated next to criminals some handcuffed to guards, some that if you seen coming towards you on the street youd cross the road if not the right setting for these types of cases.

I think it would be less stressful and humiliating if these cases were heard in private or at the very least at the end of court and if needs be in front of the defendants who are in the same boat.

Are we "criminals" too for falling on hard times, are we a required to have the presence of what must have been 15-20 guards all in uniform getting paid by taxpayers to listen to these case's while waiting for their case to come up. To me it would make sense that the criminal cases be heard first and that all these guards could go back on duty and not spend the morning having a joke and a laugh with each other.
 
It would also help to retain some dignity if the judges started on time and at least advised what would be heard pre lunch and post lunch rather than having a packed court room for the day.

Judges like that should not be allowed to judge.
 
I am sorry your court experience was so awful, cavan1212. District Justices are a mixed group, and it sounds like you got one of the more unsympathetic ones.

There is something from which you can draw an almost perverse consolation: your financial situation can hardly get worse. They can't take from you money that you don't have. So do your best, and leave it at that.

Look after the really important things, like your own well-being and that of your family.

Thank you for coming back to tell us about things on a day that obviously did not go very well. Let us hope that a visit to MABS will help you get things back on track.
 
Hi Cavan

I can't find anything online explaining what to do from a debtor's perspective.

Call [broken link removed]on 1890 350 250

The best explanation I can find is from a creditor's point of view:


Where a debtor or creditor wishes to apply to the Court to vary the terms of an instalment order, that person shall apply to the Clerk for the issue of a summons in the form 53.6 Schedule C. The summons shall be served upon the creditor or the debtor, as the case may be, in accordance with the provisions of Order 10. When service has been effected, the original summons, together with a statutory declaration as to service thereof, shall be lodged with the Clerk at least four days before the date fixed for the hearing of the application.
An order of the Court granting the application shall be in the form 53.7 schedule C. The applicant shall cause that order to be served upon the other party in accordance with the provisions of Order 10. An order varying an instalment order shall not so operate as to make the instalment order enforceable after the expiration of twelve years from the date of the relevant Judgment.
Whenever a debtor fails to comply with an Instalment Order, a creditor may apply for a summons on failure to comply with an instalment order. This is in form 53.8 schedule c of the District Court rules. The creditor shall prepare and lodge with the Clerk of the District Court a summons in duplicate a statutory declaration in the form 53.9 schedule C. The Clerk shall list the matter for hearing and having completed and signed the original together copy summons, shall issue that summons to the creditor for service upon the debtor.
It is very important to note that the summons on failure to comply with an instalment order is served personally upon the debtor (unless the Judge of the District Court directs service otherwise) at least fourteen days before the date of sitting of the Court at which the debtor is directed to appear.
The creditor must lodge, after serving of the summons on failure to comply with an instalment order on the debtor, with the District Court Clerk the original of the summons together with a statutory declaration as to service thereof at least four days before the said date of sitting of the Court.
The Court shall, should the debtor fail to appear before the District Court, without reasonable excuse, after receiving the summons, issue a warrant for the arrest of the debtor. The warrant will be in the form 53.10 schedule 10 of the District Court Rules.
A Judge may treat the hearing of a summons on failure to comply with an instalment order as an application for variation of the instalment order.
A Judge may also request the creditor and the debtor to seek resolution by mediation within such period as the Judge may specify. The Judge can adjourn the proceedings generally with liberty to re-enter them. Where the creditor wishes to re-enter the proceedings, he shall apply in writing to the Clerk for re-entry, certifying in that the application at mediation has failed to achieve a resolution. The Clerk shall re-list the proceedings for hearing and shall send notice of the re-listing in the form 53.11 schedule C to the debtor and to the creditor by ordinary post.
At the hearing of the summons on failure to comply with an instalment, order the creditor must demonstrate to the Court that the debtor has failed to discharge their obligations under the instalment order due to their wilful refusal or culpable neglect and that the debtor has no goods that may satisfy the execution of the Judgment.
The above may sound like a very onerous position for the creditor however; it is worth remembering that the debtor provided the information that resulted in the instalment order. Thus if it was found at the examination hearing stage that the debtor could only pay a certain sum then this may be evidence enough at the summons on failure to comply with the instalment order stage that the debtor has the means to pay that amount but has refused or neglected to pay that sum.
With regard to the issue of the debtor having no goods to satisfy the Judgment, the returned execution document marked “nula bona” may be evidence enough. However, as there are now no persons to act as Court messengers or sheriffs in some parts of the country it may be more difficult to do this. Unless the Court would accept a formal request for goods to satisfy the Judgment from the credit to the debtor being either refused or ignored as satisfactory in place of a document marked “nula bona” then creditors in such positions may face an insurmountable obstacle.
At this stage if the creditor can satisfy the Court as to the requirements set out above the judge may make an order for arrest and imprisonment or an order for arrest and imprisonment with a postponed conditionally.
It is important to note that a judge will not make a conditional postponement order or an order for arrest and imprisonment against a member of the defence forces or a member of the reserve defence forces.
Where the Court makes an order for postponement with condition and the debtor fails to comply with a condition a warrant may issue. The creditor must prove by statutory declaration that such a failure occurred. The Court Clerk is to receive the statutory declaration and the Clerk may issue a warrant or re-enter the matter before the Court.
If the Court make an order for arrest and imprisonment with a postponement on condition and the debtor does not comply with the condition if the matter is re-entered before the Court, as the Clerk may do, the Court can treat that hearing as an application to vary provided the debtors circumstances have changed.
A debtor may apply to the Court while in prison for re-entry of the matter provided their circumstances have changed. The Clerk shall re-list the matter for hearing and shall notify the creditor, the debtor and the Governor of the prison of the re-listing. This is by form 53.16 schedule C and served by ordinary post and such other means, as he considers appropriate.
Where a debtor lodges a notice of appeal, and enters a recognisance (if required), against an order for arrest and imprisonment and the warrant to enforce the order has not been issued. The warrant will not issue until there is a decision on the appeal or the appellant has failed to perform the conditions of the recognisance, as the case may be.
Where a warrant has issued but not executed when a notice of appeal is lodged, the Clerk shall notify the Superintendent of the Garda Síochána to whom the warrant was addressed to return the warrant for cancellation by the Court.
 
Hello, I am so sorry that you had this experience. It is a shame that these judges represent us in this manner. I recently read about a new bill that would make judges accountable - does anybody know what this is likely to consist of, accountable for what?
You are a decent citizen trying to do your best. Few judges would fault you. Do your best. If that is the best that judge could do - he does not measure up to your standards. Mabs are very good. Citizens Best wishes Browtal
 
From the Debt Recovery Handbook
Author: Colman Curran
Publisher: Round Hall Press

Note:
The book is published by Round Hall Press and is now slightly out of date - the chapter on judgment mortgages has been overtaken by the new Land & Conveyancing Law Reform Act 2009 and the new Committals process is as yet, substantially untried.

ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGMENT: INSTALMENT ORDERS

11–01 Among the more commonly used methods of enforcing a judgment against an individual is that of the instalment order process. This is a remedy where a judgment debtor can be examined as to his means in the district court irrespective of which court issued the original judgment. The examination will always be in the district court area where the judgment debtor resides. The process is governed by the Enforcement of Court Orders Acts 1926 and 1940.

11–02 Following the assessment of the Debtor’s income, assets and expenditure, the district court judge can make an appropriate Instalment Order, directing that the debtor make periodic payments to the creditor. In this way the creditor can get phased payments in respect of the judgment debt, interest & costs, based on the debtor’s means. Failure on the part of the debtor to make the payments ordered is a statutory contempt of court. If the judgment debtor does not comply, the creditor used to be able to make an application to the district court to have the debtor committed to prison for a period to be specified by the judge, in order to “purge” his contempt but this process has recently been declared unconstitutional by the high court. The instalment order process is favoured by banks and credit institutions as a means of recovering small and medium sized debts, such as judgments arising out of credit card debts, hire purchase default, personal loans, etc. Although the requirement for court appearances can make the process both expensive and tedious, banks (or other organisations with high volumes of debts such as utility companies) may engage in the process to advertise the adverse effects of default to compliant customers.

Procedure

11–03 A Summons for Attendance of the debtor is prepared in duplicate and lodged in the appropriate district court office with the original decree/execution order/FIFA, etc. The Summons for Attendance must be accompanied by an Application for the Summons of Attendance of Debtor, which is usually signed and sworn by the solicitor for the creditor.

11–04 The summons is returned by post in duplicate with the appropriate court hearing date inserted and one copy of this is served by registered post on the judgment debtor. It requires him to prepare a written statement of means detailing his income, assets and liabilities and to appear before the district court on the specified date. The second signed copy should be lodged in the court office by the solicitor for the judgment creditor not less than 4 days before the hearing. Unfortunately, debtors often ignore the requirement to prepare or file a statement of means and simply show up in court to be examined.


The Instalment Order Hearing

11–05 Assuming the debtor attends at the hearing – and often they do not – the Debtor will be examined by the court as to his circumstances including what he does for a living, whether he owns property, what liabilities he has, etc. The solicitor for the judgment creditor will have an opportunity to cross examine him. The judgment debtor may also be legally represented but this is unusual. There is no requirement for a creditor witness to attend.

11–06 Usually the judge will make an order - an Instalment Order - that the debtor discharges the debt on the basis of a weekly or monthly amount, which he/she feels the debtor can realistically afford to pay to the judgment creditor. NOTE: The plaintiff’s solicitor is expected be able to give the court some information in relation to the debtor’s circumstances and on that basis suggest an appropriate instalment amount to the court.
The hearing will proceed in the debtor’s absence once good service is proven and judges do not make instalment orders against debtors who can prove that they are on social welfare.

Service of the Instalment Order

11–07 If an Instalment Order is granted, it should be prepared in duplicate by the plaintiff’s solicitor and lodged in the district court office for signing. It is then returned and one copy must be served on the judgment debtor.
It will usually specify a time when the first payment becomes due and this is usually 7 days after service of the Instalment Order on the debtor.

11–08 There is a lobby which advocates the repeal of the Enforcement of Court Orders Acts 1926 and 1940 and it has been suggested that the current procedure should be replaced by an attachment of earnings/social welfare payments system. However, whilst this may be effective against those in receipt of a wage or social welfare payments, it may not be effective against the many judgment debtors who are self-employed.




Change in the law re Committals

11-09 In a judgment given by Laffoy J. in the Caroline McCann case in the High Court on the 18 June 2009, the applicant obtained – in judicial review proceedings – an order quashing a committal order of Monaghan District Court, providing for her arrest and imprisonment for arrears of instalments not paid. Judge Laffoy ruled that the legislation that allowed the District Court to make such an order - section 6 of the Enforcement of Court Orders Act 1940 - was unconstitutional on a number of grounds, chiefly that the legislation breached the applicant’s rights to fair procedures and personal liberty under the Constitution.

11-10 The decision was given in judicial review proceedings taken by the applicant against a number of State entities, including the District Court Judge, the Garda Commissioner, the Prison Service, the Minister for Justice and the Attorney General.

11-11 In the absence of an appeal, it seems that the declaration of unconstitutionality of section 6 amounts to a judicial death certificate for the provision itself. Obviously, section 6 deals with the committal order part of the procedure – and the decision will not affect a creditor's entitlement to obtain an instalment order.

11-12 The following is a description of the process for committal prior to the June, 2009 High Court decision referred to above. The government has introduced new legislation which anticipates a different form of committal process which incorporates aspects of the process which obtained before June 2009.

Position Prior to the Caroline McCann case
11-13 Prior to Laffoy J.’s High Court decision, if a debtor failed to make the instalment payments as ordered, then the creditor could request the District Court office to issue a Committal Summons with a view to having the debtor jailed for contempt. In practice this was only done when sufficient arrears of unpaid instalments had built up to make the process worthwhile but this process has now been declared to be unconstitutional.

Committal Hearings
11-14 At the committal hearing the creditor would have a witness present in court, to give evidence of the default in question i.e. that the debtor failed to comply with the Instalment Order. Most district judges were reluctant to make a Committal Order unless it could be shown that there had been wilful failure or neglect on the part of the judgment debtor. Some judges treated committal applications as applications to vary the instalment order in order to avoid making a committal order at all. If the debtor could not convince the court as to why he should not be imprisoned, then an order committing him to prison for contempt for up to ninety days, would often be made against him. Somewhere between three and fourteen days was more the norm.

Imprisonment of Debtor
11-15 Many judgment creditors were in the habit of stopping at the point of obtaining a committal order and did not lodge the order and warrant to imprison the debtor to avoid the final step of imprisonment. The Gardai were also often reluctant arrest and imprison people for debt although the way arrest warrants were dealt with varied between Garda stations. Often criticised as being a draconian method for the enforcement of a judgment, committal was seen sometimes as the only effective method against “won’t pay” hardened debtors and it took the intervention of the Gardai before they would be prepared to make a payment proposal.

11-16 The fact that the Debtor served time in prison for contempt arising out of the non payment of instalments on the Instalment Order, did not forgive the debt and the creditor could still pursue other remedies to recover the judgment debt.


New Legislation to Replace existing Committal Rules: Enforcement of Court Orders (Amendment) Act 2009
11-17 The 2009 Act amends Sections 6 and 8 of the Enforcement of Court Orders Act 1940. It allows a creditor to issue a summons to bring a debtor to court if he has defaulted on an instalment order.

11-18 It will have the effect of ensuring that if a debtor does not appear in Court having defaulted on an instalment order, a warrant can be issued to arrest him/her and bring him/her before the court. This will enable the court to hear both the debtor’s and the creditor’s case and satisfy itself whether the debtor has wilfully refused to pay and that all other steps possible, including instalment payments and mediation, have been taken to recover the debt.

11-19 The new act empowers the court to make various orders to include a variation of the original instalment order, directing mediation between the parties, sentencing a debtor to prison with a stay of execution provided the debtor follows court directions regarding payment or simply order a prison sentence. However, in a departure from the previous committal system, the court will not imprison the debtor unless it is satisfied that s/he has the means to pay. There is also a new provision for legal aid in circumstances where the debtor is at risk of imprisonment.

11-20 Announcing the Government’s approval, the Minister said: "This provision is part of the framework used in civil disputes in relation to debt enforcement. It is used sparingly by the courts, even prior to the recent High Court judgment. However its value is its persuasive power – people tend to settle up when they know they are at risk of prison. I think it is important for the sake of small creditors and especially for family law maintenance disputes, to bring certainty to the current situation, while taking account of the High Court’s view that people who can’t afford to pay shouldn’t be imprisoned. These amendments will achieve that and I am satisfied they are warranted."

11-21 The Law Reform Commission has published a wide ranging consultation paper on personal debt management and enforcement in September 2009. The Report recommends an emphasis on non-judicial debt settlement processes, certain changes to debt enforcement and efforts to distinguish between those who cannot pay and those who will not pay. The Report also questions the usefulness of imprisonment in the context of debt enforcement.

Alternatives
11-22 The Government could also consider Attachment of Earnings orders which are widely available in other jurisdictions or privatisation of the Sheriff’s role as has occurred in England. It is important that there is an effective sanction for non payment of debt to avoid the cost of default being passed on to innocent parties.

 
Reproduced with the permission of the author:

CHAPTER 18
WHEN ACTING FOR A DEFENDANT​
There are no specific rules as to how to advise a defendant in debt collection litigation because the circumstances will vary in each case. There are some general issues which should be checked out prior to responding to the plaintiffs claim and some of these are set out below. A defendant will often be trying to settle at a discount and the skill involved in advising him is to find the best point at which to settle and at the lowest cost. Defending a case can also involve some experience and intuition too. For example if a company without tangible assets owes a debt in the region of €12,000.00 and the plaintiff threatens to wind it up, it will be apparent to an experienced practitioner that there is little reality in the threat given the cost of bringing a petition relative to the size of the debt.

Does the Plaintiff Exist?

16–01 If the plaintiff is a company, the debtor should conduct a companies office search against it initially to establish that it is properly registered at the time of the proceedings and also at the time of the contract and delivery of the goods or services which are the subject matter of the contract. If the plaintiff is not properly constituted, the defendant may be able to stop the proceedings on procedural grounds.

Has the Correct Defendant been identified?

The Plaintiff may believe that he has been dealing with a sole trader whereas the contract may legally be with a company. Sometimes Plaintiffs mistakenly sue the wrong legal person or legal entity and this matter should be clarified at the outset when advising a defendant. If the wrong legal entity has been sued, the wronged party can apply to have the proceedings struck out with costs against the plaintiff.

Is Service Good?

16–02 If the defendant is a company, it should satisfy itself that the proceedings have been served at its registered office. Proceedings served at a trading address which is not the registered office are not properly served unless an appearance is entered by the defendant that rectifies this defect. As always, if there is a doubt as to the validity of service of the proceedings, practitioners should be careful about entering an appearance.

Jurisdiction

16–03 The endorsement of claim should also specify why it is that the plaintiff is suing in the particular jurisdiction, e.g. defendant resides/operates a place of business there. Practitioners should check with clients that this is, in fact, true. Also, if there is a formal contract, it may have a choice of law or a jurisdiction clause and this should be investigated to make sure that the proceedings have been brought in the correct jurisdiction. Again, practitioners should exercise care before entering an appearance which acknowledges the jurisdiction of the court.

Relevant Legislation


Practitioners should advise defendants if their statutory rights have been infringed during the pre-legal or legal debt collection process. Relevant legislation would include The Statute of Limitations Act – is the debt more than six years old? (the estate of a deceased debtor can only be sued within two years of the date of death); the Data Protection Act – has the creditor obtained information about the debtor improperly?; unfair terms in contracts legislation – is the contract legal?; consumer legislation – have the terms of the Consumer Credit Act been complied with by a bank?; have the banking small business and mortgage codes issued by the Financial Regulator been complied with?, etc.


Notice for Particulars

16–04 A defendant should seek particulars of the debt claimed to include a breakdown of how the total is made up, how interest has been calculated and whether proper credits have been allowed if appropriate. It may be that a defendant has a right of set off regarding all or part of the debt. A defendant should satisfy himself that he understands fully the extent of the claim and all of its elements and that the factual matters pleaded in the claim are correct. A plaintiff should answer the defendant’s reasonable questions about the claim and should not apply for judgment without having done so. A defendant should warn a plaintiff that if he does so apply for judgment, without providing such reasonable answers, then the defendant will seek to set aside that judgment and will rely on the letter he is sending to ground an application for the costs of having to so set it aside.

Part-Payment/Settlement

16–05 If part of the debt is admitted by a defendant, that amount should be paid if possible so that the court case will be about the disputed amount only. This may have the effect of making it necessary to transfer proceedings to a lower court, depending on the remaining value of the plaintiff's claim. This can have important costs consequences for a client. At this point, it may be appropriate to make without prejudice settlement offer of the admitted part of the debt together with part of the sum in dispute to buy off the risk and cost of court proceedings.
If the full amount tendered cannot be paid all at once, a phased payment arrangement over a number of months could be offered. This may be attractive to a plaintiff who is not sure of how strong his case is. If the plaintiff refuses the phased payment proposal, a defendant can attend court and ask the court to make an instalment judgment and vouch his circumstances in writing in support of such an application. Alternatively, if judgment is being given against him in court, he can request a stay on execution to enable him to assemble enough money to pay the debt.

Defending a Case

16–06 If the entire debt is disputed, the defendant should inform the plaintiff in writing and say that a default judgment application should not be made. On receipt of clear instructions to act on behalf of a properly served defendant, a practitioner should enter an appearance as soon as possible to prevent the plaintiff obtaining judgment in default. If the debt falls within the High Court jurisdiction, this will mean the plaintiff has to set his case down for hearing before the Master. In these circumstances, a plaintiff may be more amenable to settlement. Plaintiffs will wish to avoid the costs and the time it will take to get the case listed for hearing coupled with the costs of the inevitable adjournments.

16–07 Any case where a defendant is incorrectly sued or does not owe the debt should be defended vigorously. Often however, there are borderline cases where there is a dispute between the parties, perhaps in respect of the goods or services provided. In such cases it is necessary to strike a balance between the defendant’s entitlement to refuse to pay the sum demanded arising out of the alleged negligence/breach of contract of the plaintiff, and the costs he will incur in defending the action, which will be compounded if he loses following a full trial of the matter. The eventual outcome of such litigation is never certain.

Counterclaims

A defendant may feel that there is some or no merit in a plaintiff’s claim and a practitioner will have to prepare a defence based on those instructions. Sometimes a defendant may say that whilst there is some merit in the plaintiffs claim, he has a counterclaim against the plaintiff which would have the effect of either abating the amount of the plaintiffs claim or eliminating it altogether. Such a counterclaim is included in a defendant’s written defence. The counterclaim should clearly articulate why the defendant says that the plaintiff owes him money in the same way that the plaintiffs indorsement of claim articulates the principal cause of action. For example a defendant may assert that a certain element of product supplied by a plaintiff was supplied on a sale or return basis and that he is due credits arising from the return of products which have not been allowed by the plaintiff. Another example might be where a plaintiff provided a service such as the installation of software and because one of the software modules would not operate, the defendant may be due an appropriate credit.

If a defendant raises a counterclaim in a defence or by way of replying affidavit, it is open to a plaintiff to seek further particulars of the nature of the counterclaim and subsequently file a formal defence to the counterclaim.

Practitioners should note

16–08 Practitioners acting for defendants should be especially careful to keep in touch with the plaintiff or plaintiff’s solicitor and make sure that a default judgment application is not made because a time limit has expired. They should also advise their defendant clients of the consequences of judgment to include the extra interest & costs and the types of enforcement activity which can be expected if the judgment debt is not paid.

Application to Set a Default Judgment Aside


If a default judgment is obtained against a defendant an application can be brought to set it aside in order to file a defence. The court will assess any such application on its merits taking factors such as bad service of the summons, delay on the part of the defendant, evidence of intention to defend, etc. into account. If the court accedes to the set aside application, it will normally impose conditions such as lodgement of part or all of the judgment amount, and costs of the application to set aside may be awarded against the applicant/defendant. Generally the longer it takes the defendant to apply to set aside, the more onerous the conditions imposed by the court will be.

Appeals


If a defendant is unhappy with a judgment given against him he can appeal within the specified timeframe and have another day in a higher court on the merits of the case. Practitioners should note that an appeal is no bar to enforcement of the original judgment unless a stay has been placed on that judgment.
 
Back
Top