Bath v Escott, Court of Appeal - Chancery Division, May 11, 2017, [2017] EWHC 1101 (Ch)

Issuing Organization:Chancery Division
Actores:Bath v Escott
Resolution Date:May 11, 2017
 
FREE EXCERPT

Case No: 3BS30636

Neutral Citation Number: [2017] EWHC 1101 (Ch)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE

CHANCERY DIVISION

BRISTOL DISTRICT REGISTRY

Bristol Civil Justice Centre

2 Redcliff Street, Bristol, BS1 6GR

Date: 11/05/2017

Before :

HHJ PAUL MATTHEWS

(sitting as a Judge of the High Court)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Between :

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Application dealt with on paper

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

JudgmentHHJ Paul Matthews :

  1. The defendant applies by notice dated 26 April 2017 for an order that the audio recording of the judgment of District Judge Britton given in the Bristol District Registry of the High Court on 18 August 2014 be released

    ``to Truro County Court for voice recognition at the trial on 8 May 2017... for forced sale of the property. The transcript by Carter [sic] Walsh was generated one year later. It is not true to what was said in court.''

  2. The application was supported under box 10 of Form N244 by identifying certain information on which the applicant would be relying. There were two items. The first was a letter from the civil appeals office dated 19 May 2015, and the second was the transcript of a judgment given by District Judge Britton on 18 August 2014. The letter from the civil appeals office simply informed the applicant that the master of civil appeals had directed that a transcript of the judgment of HH Judge McCahill QC dated 26 August 2014 be ordered at the public expense. But, as the applicant says in his application notice, box 10, it is clear that the judge concerned was District Judge Britton. So the letter does not take the matter further. As to the transcript, it is unmarked, so that there is no indication of which part or parts the applicant objects to. There is no other evidence in support of the application.

  3. At the outset, I should say that it is regrettable that I am dealing with this application on paper only after the date of 8 May 2017, when there was apparently to be a hearing at the County Court at Truro. This is because, when the papers were delivered to my room on 4 May, I was already in court, dealing with a busy whole day list, and unfortunately did not notice these papers, and in particular that there was a hearing listed for 8 May. On 5 May I was absent on annual leave giving a lecture elsewhere in the country, and on Monday 8 May I commenced what was intended to be a four-day trial.

  4. I do not know what was the result of that...

To continue reading

REQUEST YOUR FREE TRIAL