Recently, many Judges had started to assert that attendance by an advocate only is not compliant with CPR 27.9. A recent Court of Appeal decision has confirmed otherwise.

In Owen v Black Horse Ltd [2023] EWCA Civ 325 the Court considered a claim that had been struck out at the start of a Small Claims Track hearing on the grounds that attendance by the Claimant’s legal representative did not amount to attendance by the claimant in accordance with CPR 27.9.

The Court of Appeal has allowed the Appeal and held that a litigant has the right to appear by legal representative.

The key section of this hearing is “The essential point is that a party to litigation is entitled to represent himself, or to be represented by a legal representative or representatives. Part 27 does not expressly impinge on that right. Yet if R is right, a party who does not attend the hearing of a small claim in person and is not represented is in a better position than a party who does not attend that hearing in person, but is represented. The former can apply to have any judgment under rule 27.9 set aside, but the latter cannot.”

This judgment shows a common sense approach to litigation in ensuring that the Courts do not treat attendance by legal representation alone as tantamount to any party failing to attend.