nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Lay Litigation

LayLitigant

Hi,

I am finding it very difficult to find other people in Ireland who are acting as lay litigants, so that we can discuss our experiences with lay litigation.

If you are a lay litigant, please join in the discussion so that we can discuss the problems that we have encountered, and our experiences in dealing with the courts.

There is no need to give specific details about your case.

The purpose is to share experiences so that we can learn from each others experiences, if possible.

Thank You,

LayLitigant

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

LayLitigant

whippet

There are plenty of facebook groups that I’ve seen championing the cause of lay litigants …. However i wouldn’t be seeking them out for advice - I tend to read for amusement

Red Hare

I’ve been a lay litigant for years, at courts, and candlelight vigils..

I have had several successful outcomes, more success than failures - but i would not recommend D.I.Y. to others, and I have a few potential failures to combat in the near future.

Your suggestion that we can learn from each other is good and positive, but you will learn nothing from me because I often am daft, especially in this forum. 🎩 but I have learned a lot here, so thanks

Citizens information is a good source of legal information for lay litigants🦭🐬The Courts are not the problem its your opponents that you need to compete with!!

LayLitigant

I am not looking for advice or guidance, but just to converse with other lay litigants in relation to their experiences.

So far, I have come to the following conclusions since I had to get involved in civil proceedings.

. It helps if you have done nothing wrong, but the law is not always just, such as in "Equity's Darling"

. Most solicitors are chancers

. Most barristers are specialists

. All Judges were once a solicitor or a barrister

. Every problem (applicable law) has an answer to it, but you might not like the answer

. Fail to Prepare - Prepare to Fail

. Lay litigation is not for everyone as it requires hard work and a lot of time for study and research

. Understanding is the hardest part - the sharing of experiences by lay litigants might help with the understanding

rameire

Have you checked in with Ben, what does he say?

blackwhite

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2056353782/freeman-megamerge

Try this thread for countless examples of how not to conduct yourself as a lay litigant, and for an ever-growing list of grifters that any lay litigant would be well advised to avoid listening to at all costs.

DavMal222

I am interested in lay litigant unauthorised planning cases.

I am a EuroLaw Environment Consultant

Red Hare

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120276846#Comment_120276846

There was a fairly recent case where Meenan J ruled on a case that involved Mannix Flynn supporting a resident in his concern re traffic/transport related planning in the Sandymount area of Dublin.

[Deleted User]

Drop into Clarke's pub (back room) in Phibsboro between 8pm and 10pm tonight, Monday, and you'll find the Talk2Us group discussing family law problems. There are plenty of lay litagants there and people helping others in representing themselves in a family law case. They've been doing this for decades now. https://www.talk2us.ie/

Red Hare

That is a very useful help for Family Law Lay/Self Litigants that has been shared here.

Donald Trump

Why wouldn't you just put in the bit of effort and actually study law and get a qualification in it if you are interested?

Claw Hammer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120360672#Comment_120360672

It takes time and money to study law. Evne with a qualification the O/P would still be a self representing litigant with very little greater ability to act in his case. Many basic qualification have no module on evidence, none have any on procedure, advocacy or tactics.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120365322#Comment_120365322

The direct money is very little in the big scheme of things.

You can become a qualified barrister, even if you left school at aged 15 years ago, for about 20k.

They can do a part time course in Griffith for a few k a year.

Pint money over a few years

Claw Hammer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120365337#Comment_120365337

Whatever about the relative amount of money, admission to the degree of barrister at law means either being a solicitor already or passing an entrance exam which requires a degree or equivalent in order to be eligible to sit the entrance exam.

Even at that it is only a basic qualification. A degree from Griffith would not be much help to a lay litigant. No advocacy, procedure or tactics. The only Griffith course which might be of some use is the Legal Executive course which would give some grounding in procedure.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120366397#Comment_120366397

It costs 10k for the King's Inns Diploma and about 12.5k for the BL. So a bit over 20k. No formal requirements to get onto the Diploma course. They have potential scholarships for candidates that would not be able to otherwise afford the courses.

Is it going to teach you everything and make you an expert - no, of course not. Will you learn more than you'd learn listening to some freeman-of-the-land spoofer - yes, most definitely.

Claw Hammer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120367182#Comment_120367182

To be admitted to the Diploma you have to have a degree or be accepted as a mature student. If you pass the diploma you then have to pass the entrance exam to the barrister course. People who have done undergraduate law degrees have failed the entrance exam. In addition to the 10k a lot of time has to be expended to pass the exams and prepare for the entrance exam. There is a cheaper course in TUD if a person was minded to study law.

Studying any course and passing it is still not going to prepare a person to act in their own case. It might enable a person to understand some of what happens and be less receptive to freemen. That is about it.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120373488#Comment_120373488

None of your post is relevant to the point. If someone is interested in the law, it is very accessible for them to qualify if they want to put in a bit of effort. If aren't interested in law then I'm not suggesting they are forced to do it against their will

Claw Hammer

My point is that it takes time and money to obtain a qualification. You have been trying to suggest that a legal qualification can be obtained for a small outlay.

Many people can't afford either the time or the money to obtain a qualification and if they embark on that route they should be aware that it will not be of much use as a lay litigant.

It is nothing to do with being interested in law.

Donald Trump

If they have the time to waste "discussing" the law with the likes of the "freemen" chancers then they have a certain amount of time that can be put towards formal study.

The outlay really is minimal in the larger scheme of things. While I appreciate that it might seem a large amount to some, when spread over three or four years, it really is only pint money for a large chunk of the population. 100 quid a week for the next 4 years (you'd get back a little bit in tax refunds as well). While you are working too if you go for the 4 years.

And, as I said, there are actually decent scholarships available if one can't actually afford it.

While you insist that it would not be of any use to a lay litigant, the BL degree is a practitioner degree rather than substantive law. You have your substantive law education complete before entry - hence the entrance examinations. So I can't see it "not be[ing] of much use". It won't make them an expert but it will get them used to some basics.

If you don't have the time or money to learn, you likely don't have the time or money to waste making an eejjit of yourself in court.

[Deleted User]

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120374727#Comment_120374727

I’m sorry but there’s a big difference between spending some free time discussing the law and spending €20k to become a qualified barrister.

that’s what you do if you want to have a career in law not just discussing it.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120374935#Comment_120374935

Some people do those courses purely out of interest and with no intention of ever practicing. For example, people do them from the civil service because the civil service supports them in terms of tuition and also some study time. In fact the opposite also happens - I've heard of people who get into the civil service because they are thinking of doing those courses and want to get the support.

A lot of people who try to get into politics, or who else are already in politics, also do them but with no intention of practicing (at least not immediately). If you receive Seanad voting papers for your university constituency, you will probably see quite a high percentage of them as either doing, or having completed, the BL.

Others do those qualifications because they want to understand the law because of some cause or other that they are committed to - for example it could be environmental issues or homelessness.

There will also be retired people who are doing them out of interest too.

I am merely making the point that they are quite accessible to anyone and that if you are actually interested in the area, you could get qualified. So to me it would make sense to do so if it really means something to a person

[Deleted User]

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120375302#Comment_120375302

what is the point in being qualified in law if you don’t intend to practice it. Also simply doing a course won’t qualify you anyway you need to train for a while with a solicitor or barrister as far as I’m aware.

so it’s not as easy as just doing a course.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120377721#Comment_120377721

Many people do it to gain an understanding of the law. And some do it simply out of interest. I gave some examples in the post you responded to. Plenty of people study law in university who don't go on to "practice" either. Would you question the point of them doing that too?

What do you learn? Well you'd learn how to read and understand legislation, the importance of procedure and process, how to formulate and present an argument, advocacy for others, mediation etc. Loads of skills which are transferable to general careers.

(BTW, technically, you are a qualified barrister once you complete the BL. You will have to do at least one year's deviling if you want to practice, but that does not mean you are not "qualified". Some people qualify, then return to their regular job, and can go back and do their deviling and then practice when they retire from that job......they'll never earn big money but that isn't their point. The qualification is in your back pocket as an added tool should you ever wish to use it.)

Also, as an addendum, a high proportion of people who qualify are working in a different industry after 5-7 years even if it was their original plan to practice

Claw Hammer

None of the categories of people doing the Bl who donot wish to pursue a career in law include prospective lay litigants. A person who can write BL after their name may never have filed a document in a court office, know how court lists operate or the quirks of individual judges. This is essential knowledge for any litigant.

Not everyone wants to , or can, spend €20k plus a huge amount of time obtaining the degree of BL. Lost of skills are transferable to different areas but people can't spend their lives acquiring skills for the fun of it.

Red Hare

Being a litigant in person, in my experience arose from circumstances where due to financial difficulty during the past recession I represented myself under Irish statute based on an EU Employment Directive and I was succesful; but I could not find a solicitor to represent me in enforcing the remedy ordered.

The suggestion of litigants in person training to become barrister is not suitable to my situation. From experience I know that solicitors and barristers are mostly not expert in EU employment laws. I have several experiences of seeing them rely on google. Even if I trained to be a barrister or solicitor, that training is generalist. I would not have expertise in Equal Treatment laws of Europe, which is the legal help I need. I can google myself for free. It is so unproductive and expensive for me to pay lawyers to print me off google information that i already accessed. Having charged me for that type of service they then decline to represent me, stating that as a litigant in person, they are not in a position to represent me.

LayLitigant

I think some have gone way off topic!

Not interested in training for anything, let alone some law degree.

The purpose of the thread is simple - for people who are/might be attending court as a lay litigant in person, for whatever reason.

Not looking for help from anyone, as I am well able to read and write and click a little mouse button myself!

I will say one thing, and that is, it appears to me that in order to understand what it is you must do to win your case (providing of course you are not in the wrong, for if you are then you really have an uphill battle), then you best be prepared to do some very serious research in relation to the relevant law (be it statute or precedent, or both).

There are some well proven techniques for analysing cases (mostly US based such as IRAC), but it is easy to get sucked into using fancy techniques and stylish acronyms, and forget about what really matters - being able to argue your case in court and convincing the Judge that he/she should grant you what you are looking for!

Red Hare

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058217338/lay-litigation

This thread started, I understooodd, as as discussion, but in post no 4 by the OP it doesn't seem to be so.

LayLitigant

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120983271#Comment_120983271

Not too many interested by the looks of things, which is very understandable.

Most people who have had dealings with solicitors and barristers would agree with my statements.

LayLitigant

BTW, if anyone with a keen interest in court cases is interested, I have a case coming up in the near future, and as I am a lay litigant, I am considering getting some assistance from a McKenzie Friend in court for taking notes during the hearing, as there are times when I will not be able to take notes myself.

It will be a good opportunity for the right person to learn a bit about how cases are run, won and lost!

The case will be in Waterford, so best suited to someone locally.

This is not a training exercise, but will be a good opportunity for the right person to get some first hand court experience, which of course is far better than reading a thousand books.

Covid19

To steer this thread back:

I am separated a number of years, with one 10 year old child.

I have an excellent relationship with my son, but despite numerous court appearances, with solicitors, I can just see him two weekends a month.

My ex-wife suffers from mental illness and the living conditions of her house ( which is actually still ours, technically) is shocking, from a hoarding and clutter perspective. Both myself and her brother tried to intervene to help her, and her immediate reaction was to send me a Claim for Divorce, filled with crazy demands, untruths etc. ( she has kneejerk anger issues). This, even though we had come to a verbal agreement where I was going to leave her pension, give her the house, etc.

I entered an appearance in my local court office, but As I had moved house, I missed the deadline for putting in a defence.

She is using Legal Aid and I will be a Lay Litigant as I have no money.

Due to her claims, demands etc, I know that my defence, which is clear, can be well vouched, and paints my ex to be mentally unfit and a liar, ( and will be backed up) I know that she will lose everything, including custody of my son. Our only asset is our house and our pensions ( and hers would be considerably more than mine), so therefore I can see the judge selling the house. At the end if the day, she is a reasonably good mum to my son and he loves her dearly, because she's his Mum.

Basically, I feel the need, for my sons sake, to request a meeting with her Barrister, to fill him in on my side of the story which differs considerably from hers.

My question is, should I?

Or should I forget about a defence and let things run its course on the day? I've always paid maintenance ( in varying amounts depending on my job at various time) and I'm a very good dad to my son.)

Will I get an opportunity to explain how things really are or will a judge simply listen to her side of the story?

Thanks In advance.

C19.