Litigant In Person

There are no special rules for litigants in person.

Are There Any Rules For A Litigant In Person?

The position of litigants in person was considered in the case of Barton v Wright Hassal LLP [2018] UKSC 12 which found its way all the way to the United Kingdom Supreme Court.

Although it was finely balanced, the Court addressed the question of the indulgence (or otherwise) required by the court to litigants in person and came out in this matter with a decision that suggested a litigant in person has to ensure they comply with the rules just as a represented party would have to do so.

Judgment Extract: Litigant In Person

Lord Sumption who gave the leading decision said as follows:

… lack of representation will often justify making allowances in making case management decisions and in conducting hearings. But it will not usually justify applying to litigants in person a lower standard of compliance with rules or orders of the court. The overriding objective requires the courts so far as practicable to enforce compliance with the rules: CPR rule 1.1(1)(f). The rules do not in any relevant respect distinguish between represented and unrepresented parties. In applications under CPR 3.9 for relief from sanctions, it is now well established that the fact that the applicant was unrepresented at the relevant time is not in itself a reason not to enforce rules of court against him: R (Hysaj) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] 1 WLR 2472, para 44 (Moore-Bick LJ); Nata Lee Ltd v Abid [2015] 2 P & CR 3, [2014] EWCA Civ 1652. At best, it may affect the issue “at the margin”, as Briggs LJ observed (para 53) in the latter case, which I take to mean that it may increase the weight to be given to some other, more directly relevant factor. It is fair to say that in applications for relief from sanctions, this is mainly because of what I have called the disciplinary factor, which is less significant in the case of applications to validate defective service of a claim form. There are, however, good reasons for applying the same policy to applications under CPR rule 6.15(2) simply as a matter of basic fairness. The rules provide a framework within which to balance the interest of both sides. That balance is inevitably disturbed if an unrepresented litigant is entitled to greater indulgence in complying with them than his represented opponent. Any advantage enjoyed by a litigant in person imposes a corresponding disadvantage on the other side, which may be significant if it affects the latter’s legal rights, under the Limitation Acts for example. Unless the rules and practice directions are particularly inaccessible or obscure, it is reasonable to expect a litigant in person to familiarise himself with the rules which apply to any step which he is about to take.

What Next? Expert Advice Is Just A Click Away

If you have any questions in relation to Litigants In Person then Contact Us as soon as possible for advice. Our expertise is at your fingertips.

Disclaimer: Litigants In Person

This page: Litigants In Person  is not legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. This article Litigants In Person is provided for information purposes only. You can Contact Us on the specific facts of your case to obtain relevant advice via a Free Initial Consultation.