header-logo header-logo

29 November 2013
Issue: 7586 / Categories: Case law , Judicial line , In Court
printer mail-detail

The dreaded strike out

The notice of proposed allocation to track requires payment of the allocation fee...

The notice of proposed allocation to track requires payment of the allocation fee by a specified date and goes on to state: “Following further notice, if the allocation fee is not paid by the due date, the claim will be automatically struck out.” What does this mean? Must the court send out another notice before the strike out occurs and, if so, what is this notice?

The procedure is governed by CPR r 3.7. There are two stages. By its notice of allocation the court requires payment of the fee by a specific date. If the fee is still outstanding at that date the court will send out a further notice which will demand payment by a later date and warn of the consequence of non-compliance, namely that the claim (or counterclaim as the case may be) will stand automatically struck out. This is the “further notice” mentioned in the question. The only salvation for the defaulting party would then be to secure relief from the strike out sanction by application on

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll