Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Judgement in Default - still not sure what this leads to?

  • 17-08-2018 04:57PM
    #1
    Hannaho
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 737 ✭✭✭


    Hi! I've asked my solicitor, and I'm still not sure what this is. We're going for Judgement in Default in November - High Court - but then my solicitor says we have to have a full hearing after this. Is this true? I don't get it, why have a full hearing after a Judgement in Default motion. Basically, the defendants never put in a Defence - they've had months to do it. Can the Judge for the Motion in Default not just issue judgement saying the defendants are liable given the lack of Defence, and order them to pay??


Comments

  • #2
    hullaballoo
    Administrators, Entertainment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 18,782 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭hullaballoo


    Motions for judgment in default are rarely brought in order to actually obtain judgment. It's just the mechanism by which parties compel one another to move cases along. Defendants often use delay as a tactic (as do plaintiffs in certain cases) and the opposing parties will bring motions to counteract this inasmuch as possible.

    It would be convenient, if not just to allay the kind of confusion for lay people that can arise, if it were called a motion to compel Defence or something but it's not, it's called a motion for judgment in default of pleading.

    The reason it's not actually regarded as a means to obtain judgment is due to the constitutional right to a fair trial. Giving judgment without giving the opportunity of offering a defence is obviously not constitutional so the upshot is the motion is in effect only going to secure an extension of time for putting in the pleading with the possibility of revisiting the point should a party persist in failing to deliver the pleading.


  • #3
    Hannaho
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 737 ✭✭✭Hannaho


    Hi! hullaballoo, thanks for your reply. That clarifies it a bit for me. This might sound obtuse, but why, in a cases where the Senior Counsel, the Junior Counsel, my solicitors, and everyone who hears the story of what happened to us via builder/engineer - say that it's an open and shut case - do Defendants still want to delay - they are racking up costs all the time, which one or other of them will have to pay, depending on how liability is apportioned. Initially, they said they would settle within 6 weeks, now a year later, as they didn't settle, we're in the High Court, and despite six months of asking, one hasn't put in an appearance, and the other hasn't put in a defence. I'm not great on tactical stuff, but this seems mad!


  • #4
    randomrb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 351 ✭✭randomrb


    Hannaho wrote: »
    Hi! hullaballoo, thanks for your reply. That clarifies it a bit for me. This might sound obtuse, but why, in a cases where the Senior Counsel, the Junior Counsel, my solicitors, and everyone who hears the story of what happened to us via builder/engineer - say that it's an open and shut case - do Defendants still want to delay - they are racking up costs all the time, which one or other of them will have to pay, depending on how liability is apportioned. Initially, they said they would settle within 6 weeks, now a year later, as they didn't settle, we're in the High Court, and despite six months of asking, one hasn't put in an appearance, and the other hasn't put in a defence. I'm not great on tactical stuff, but this seems mad!

    Unfortunately this is often the way, I'm assuming its a big company/insurance/ local authority. They delay to get you more and more worried and fed up with it so that you are more likely to settle for a lower figure when it comes around.


Advertisement