Law

The current business operations have been faced with a lot of challenges ranging from legal, competition to environmental factors. Due to some individuals and companies desire to outdo their competitors in the business arena, they have negatively interfered with the internal operations of other businesses. In this regard, the affected companies have taken legal steps which are aimed at being compensated for damages. In addition, use of courts to solve disputes has been one of the avenues through which judges creates a precedent which act as the guideline to be followed in future related cases. This paper seeks to analyze the case between Ivor and Justin which took place in County court, one of the small claims court.

As mentioned earlier the case comprised of two parties including Ivor who was the claimant and Justine, the defendant. One of the particulars of the claim stated that Ivor lent Justin 900 in order to assist him to settle his electricity bill. The period of the repayment was 14 days. In addition, the claimant was entitled for 8 interest on the money lent. However, the defendant has not repaid the money to the claimant despite a continuous remainder by the claimant in the form of written as well as verbal communication. The claimant therefore took this legal step in order to recover 912 which included the sum lent to the defendant and the interest. Likewise, he wanted the defendant to compensate him for the costs incurred in the process of undertaking the legal procedure and during communication with the defendant.

The second procedure which followed the case was the signing of the statement in support of the truth by the claimant. This statement entailed self declaration by the claimant that all the particulars of the claim are true and the court should deliver the judgment based on two aspects from the defendant. The first aspect was that the defendant was grateful for the money he was lent to the extent that he promised to repay the money through a letter he sent to the claimant. Secondly, according to the claimant, the defendant had no solid prove which could make him defend the claims against him.
The application of the court affidavit by the claimant was another significant issue which I experienced in the case. During this case, the claimant wanted to be granted a charging order by the judge against the property owed by the defendant. According to the claimant, he had reliable information regarding the assets owed by the defendants. These included a large parcel of land which can be used by the court as the basis of giving the claimant a charging order. The defendant on his part signed an application of stay out of execution statement through which he maintained that the information in his application to set aside the court judgment had adequate and true information as to why the court should terminate the case against him.

The application of setting aside the judgment stipulated that the defendant was not issued with a written notice regarding the proceedings of the court. Similarly, the defendant stated that due to the failure of the court to issue him with a notice on the judgment day, the entire costs of the application was supposed to be settled by the claimant. In this regard, the defendant requested the court to allow him to defend the ruling of the court. The defendant issued a defence to the court and to the claimant in which he denied the allegations against him by the claimant as stipulated in the particulars of claim. For example, he claimed that the money lent to him was a gift and no repayment agreement was reached between him and the claimant. Secondly, the defendant maintained that he is not liable for the claimant money or interest since he (defendant) did not ask for the money either through verbal or written document.

My rule as a judge
If I was the judge my rule would be in favour of the Claimant. It is imperative to note that in all the communication between the two parties there appears that there were written documents which were signed by the two parties. By using the letters of appreciation for the money and the declaration to repay the money in 14 days as evidence, it is clear that the defendant was eligible to repay the loan.

Difference between the rule and mediation between the parties
Mediation between the two would result in a different out come. Being one of the most recognized methods of solving conflicts between two parties, mediation will make it possible to maintain positive relationship between the individuals. In this case, a neutral mediator would also ensure that the two parties co-existed peacefully. The mediator would for instance establish whether the defendant had enough money to repay the load.

Conclusion
Based on the above legal case between the Ivor and Justin, the importance of written documents during any business transaction has clearly been recognized. According to my view, the use of mediation should be emulated by conflicting parties in order to reduce the costs associated with legal procedures in courts.