3. Court summons
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic: Court summons  (Read 1152 times)

0 Members and 40 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Court summons
« Reply #15 on: »
Your WS covers Jopson v Homeguard, and other cases, and it seems to me that this is important. If it comes to court you could also expand on the fact you were explicitly given permission to stop. Other than that, you have the risk of judge lottery on the day, but if I were in your shoes I’d take that risk.
Logged
Re: Court summons
« Reply #16 on: »
So far as I can see, the fact that the car park was gated and the driver had no means of access will destroy the claimant's position - the only way the driver could access the site was when the caretaker gave specific permission and opened the gate - it is quite reasonable that the driver assumed that this was all the permission which was required in the circumstances.

The parking operator will need to show that the defendant entered a contract with them.

In order to demonstrate contract the Claimant will need to show that the driver 'intended to form a legal relationship' with the Claimant - why would the driver intend to form such a contract when they already had permission to use the car park.

The Jopson v Homeguard evidence will add further to the Claimant's woes.
« Last Edit: March 08, 2026, 12:56:06 pm by InterCity125 »
Logged
Re: Court summons
« Reply #17 on: »
Quote from: jfollows on March 08, 2026, 08:56:33 am
Your WS covers Jopson v Homeguard, and other cases, and it seems to me that this is important. If it comes to court you could also expand on the fact you were explicitly given permission to stop. Other than that, you have the risk of judge lottery on the day, but if I were in your shoes I’d take that risk.

When The driver attended court last time on original hearing date, They lost all material and the judge allowed the hearing to be adjourned for another date. He explicitly said that he will need Evidence from the driver to support the case -

The evidence he requested was, No one other than landowner can give the driver permission to park as they do not have the authority. If someone i.e Manager/Caretaker gave permission to park on what grounds is it and where is the evidence to support it.

Quote from: InterCity125 on March 08, 2026, 10:38:22 am
So far as I can see, the fact that the car park was gated and the driver had no means of access will destroy the claimant's position - the only way the driver could access the site was when the caretaker gave specific permission and opened the gate - it is quite reasonable that the driver assumed that this was all the permission which was required in the circumstances.

The parking operator will need to show that the defendant entered a contract with them.

In order to demonstrate contract the Claimant will need to show that the driver 'intended to form a legal relationship' with the Claimant - why would the driver intend to form such a contract when they already had permission to use the car park.

The Jopson v Homeguard evidence will add further to the Claimant's woes.

Have you seen the Claimants WS do you think they have shown that a contract was entered and if their WS is strong?

Its not possible to amend WS now is it?
Logged
Re: Court summons
« Reply #18 on: »
Quote
No one other than landowner can give the driver permission to park as they do not have the authority.
"Nemo dat quod non habet" perhaps?

Although that seems a fairly narrow interpretation of who can reasonably give a driver permission. If the person who allowed the driver to park was an employee of the landowner acting on behalf of them, in theory that should pass muster.

What you'll ideally need to demonstrate is that the person who told you the vehicle could be parked there was properly associated with the landowner.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]
« previous next »
  3. Court summons