MAZUR MATTERS 46: A “CLAIMANT’S REPRESENTATIVE” HAD NO RIGHT OF AUDIENCE IN THIS SMALL CLAIMS TRIAL: “IT IS TO DISTORT THE PURPOSE OF SCH 3, PARA 7 BEYOND RECOGNITION THAT THE TRADITIONAL ROLE OF AN INHOUSE MANAGING CLERK UNDERTAKING THE ROUTINE WORK OF THE DISTRICT JUDGE BE EXTENDED INTO A WHOLESALE UNQUALIFIED ADVOCACY SCHEME”

January 9, 2026 · by · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

This is the first time I have seen Mazur mentioned and considered  in an issue as to rights of audience. In this case the judge held that the representative sent by the claimant to attend a small claims trial did not have a right of audience.  They were not employed by the claimant's solicitor, nor ...

Enjoying this post?

Become a Civil Litigation Brief member to read full articles and access all premium content.

Become a member

Already a member? Log in below

Tags: , , , ,