I have a meeting next week with a barrister and will investigate this judgement and possible implications further.
Meanwhile; would anyone be able to offer opinion on the following
I did try to private message about this but my account won't seem to allow me to send it)
A case brought to the High Court under Summary Judgement, which has been adjourned a number of times by the plaintiff (bank), and then was followed by an Intention to proceed (to plenary) lodged by plaintiff.
On foot of (my) defendant's strong defence and issues raised regarding paperwork being faulty (and a request to strike out proceedings) - the Case was adjourned for papers to be read and considered.
A strike out in Master's court however can be appealed and overturned and thens runs risk of a rubber stamp judgement depending on judge.
1. HOWEVER now with this new judgement in mind: if my case is indeed struck out ... Can the plaintiff appeal it? Or do they NOW have to recommence from start and initiate plenary proceedings ?
2. Is there merit in raising as an issue - the fact that they on the last round lodged an intention to proceed (to plenary) . This seems at odds with first of all going for summary and then mid way through changing their stance to plenary...Master raised this on another case but I didn't fully follow the point and I think he may have taken time to reflect on this point also.
3. Additional defence material has also come to light ... Lodge a new supplemental affidavit or wait ?