Claims in the defence of a case are vague....

Can some parts of a defence been contested before a notice of trial is sent.

A part of the defence is very vague in its meaning and i feel it is referring to something that may not be allowed to be mentioned in the case.

Thanks to anyone who can help.

You question appears to be too vague to answer.

ONQ.

Perhaps you should serve a notice for particulars regarding any portion of the defence which you consider irrelevant etc - talk to your solicitor.

I do not have a solicitor employed because I cant afford the costs. I know I run the risk of losing my case but I definitely could not afford paying the costs of both sides.

Since your posts I have looked up a law book about 'Notice of Particulars' and from what I understand it is the defendants that can look for a Notice of Further & Better particulars after they enter an Appearance.

Can a Plaintiff also look for same after delivery of a Defence?

Some of the claims in the defence have no basis and also relate to family matters which I think cannot be mentioned in an open court.

Yes a Plaintiff can seek particulars of matters raised in a defence.

You should see a solicitor about these matters.

I think I will. Thank you for your advice.

Trying to use the rules of evidence to control what can be submitted to a judge is not something I would attempt without a sound grounding in the law and knowedge of cases where a similar strategy was tried.

The matter will be put before a judge who will rule on its inadmissability, so I fail to see a benefit to you there, except to show you were persuing a due diligence to improve the quality of evidence before the court - as opposed to prevent evidence coming before the court.

In relation to the other side having answered a question with poor clarity or definition, why is this an issue at all at this stage?

Get themin front of the judge and make mincemeant of their waffly replies and woolly clarifications.

A competent judge should see any such evasions for what they are and may be swayed to your way of thinking by the other side's poor presentation of the evidence.

Trial by insinuation is not allowed in this jurisdiction.

ONQ.

I also strongly suggest you consider the various types of ADR - Alternative Dispute Resolution.

Courts costs money.

ONQ.

Thanks to both nuac and onq for your posts. ONQ - I see your point about letting it before a judge. The claim would need to be supported by evidence.

If I were to send a notice of particulars now to the defendants would this show them that they have nothing to respond with in their replies and thus bring the defendants to the negotiating table hopefully bringing the case to an early conclusion.

I am all for a resolution especially as I do not have legal representation.

I would like to hear your opinion.

IMF,

Do not put me up as an expert in the giving of legal advice - I most definitely am not.
I am giving you common sense advice based on my laypersons view of several court cases I have attended

I was trained as an architect, and I've offered sworn declarations, signed reports and expert witness testimony to the courts.
However I am not formally legally trained and I couldn't hold a candle to a good solicitor or barrister.

In the preparation, a barrister might hold back on matters of sworn evidence to bring up issues raised in research on cross examination.
That's why I and others here are advising you to take legal advice.

It seems clear to me that, knowing you to be a layperson, they are tempting you into making basic mistakes.
Somethign is afoot, or else they would not be answering you in this fashion.

To give the opposite argument - it could be a ploy by them to hold matters back in the document exchanges that they may ambush you with in court.
This could well backfire on them if a judge takes a dim view.

ONQ.