The instructions came on Thursday: would I attend Court to defend a summary judgment hearing the following Wednesday? Indeed I would.
In gist, the landlord (the other side) says the tenant has not paid rent and has refused to leave. So they ask us to pay the outstanding rent and leave. Not an unreasonable request.
The client came in for conference on Friday and told a different tale. It had already left. The truth of the matter was that there were other problems with the flat, that is why there should be a deduction of rent.
This was not stated in any of the papers filed before, so I asked for evidence to be gathered at last minute, rushed to draft the relevant papers and applied for leave to adduce new evidence just before the hearing.
At the same time, I also complained that the plaintiff never did plead that the tenant had possession of the property, so the cause of action for tresspass was incomplete, and the case ought to be dismissed with or without the evidence.
The hearing went on a rocky start. In my excitement in preparing for the case, I neglected an absence that should strike any litigator as odd: the hearing bundle. The Judge and Counsel on the other side were discussing the case by reference to numbered pages.
Where was mine? This is something I should have thought of, but didn’t. After some hestitation I had to get up and report the problem. To keep the hearing going, the court asked the other side to indulge me by reading out the title of each document to which he refers, so that I could follow along.
But all’s well that ends well.
The Judge dismissed my application to adduce late evidence for failure to meet the stringent Ladd v Marshall requirements: in gist, there needs to be a very good excuse for evidence that could have been put in earlier to be submitted after a court imposed deadline.
I have had ocassion to rely on this many times in subsequent cases: I would not now be surprised in the least with the result.
But there was a twist. For summary judgment applications, the Judge pointed out, particularly stringent requirements apply to the pleadings: any deficiencies cannot be reparied with evidence (or amendment, at least without an adjournment
At the minimum, a claim in trespass requires the plaintiff to plead exprssly that the tenant had possession of the property. The landlord failed to do so, and this turns out to be important because the tenant is now saying it is not in possession.
Result: application dismissed with costs to the tenat, to be assessed.
I was over the moon. The prospect of a great and illustrous career opened before me, and I was day-dreaming of the day when I am elevated to the Woolsack (or equivalent) as the next Great Mind in Law.
But of course nothing of the sort happened. The solicitor who came to court with me was well pleased and promised more work. I even got a call from the partner direct in congratulation. But I didn’t hear from the firm in the next few years and life generally moved on.