Legal Ombudsman v Young [2011] EWHC 2923 (Admin), [2011] All ER (D) 144 (Nov)
The CPR Pt 8 procedure was, in principle, appropriate for proceedings under s 149 of the Legal Services Act 2007 (LSA 2007). It had to be remembered, however, that that procedure was intended and designed for cases which were not likely to be contentious on the facts. No doubt there would be cases in which the parties could not agree the facts on which the outcome of a s 149(4) process would turn. Then, if the case went on as a claim under CPR Pt 8, the court would be faced with the task of resolving factual disputes on affidavit evidence, and, usually, without hearing witnesses tested by cross-examination.
However, the Pt 8 procedure itself was flexible. CPR 8.1(3) allowed the court to order a claim to continue as if the Pt 8 procedure had not been used. The court could order the proceedings to continue as a claim under CPR Pt 7, in the appropriate track, and give the directions required. Bringing a person who was in default of s 149 of
