I have mentioned the Statutory Declaration before. It is a useful hangover from an 1835 Act that allows someone to promise that they have told the truth in a document without all the fuss of getting an Affidavit.
These days, if you go to your local courthouse (if there is one) and ask to do a Stat. Dec,. there is, I think, a fee of £25.
An old friend rang me the other day, to ask my help because his 22 year-old daughter had incurred a minor traffic penalty, but had moved house three times, as the young do, in the next couple of months. She is being pursued for the money, along with substantial added costs. Helpfully, those pursuing her had sent a draft Stat. Dec. along with an application to file the same out of time. All that she had to do was make the declaration before me, listen to my solemn warning about the consequences of perjury, and sign the papers.
The procedure is a routine one, that every magistrate will be familiar with.
In conversation, once the job was done, the young lady told me that she had found the matter distressing, particularly when she attended the local court, some five miles from home, to be told that they could not do it, and to be directed to the main court in the county, some fifty miles away despite that fact that there must have been at least a few JPs in the building at the time.
Now the whole point of having local JPs such as me is that our neighbours should know who we are and be able to approach us on small matters such as this. The stiff-necked HMCTS bureaucracy were entirely uninterested in this young woman's problem.
At least the buggers didn't get their £25.
Is it appropriate to accept a declaration from a person known to you? If I was in court and person known to me wanted to swear a declaration then I would make it known to my colleagues and withdraw. There is absolutely no way that I would hear a declaration that was from a person known to me directly or indirectly, whether in court or otherwise.
ReplyDeleteThere is no reason why a Stat Dec can't be made by a person known to you, you aren't assessing their credibility or reliability simply attesting to the fact the statement/contents were made under oath.
DeleteStat dec is not under oath.
DeleteYes, Anon. If it became known that a Stat Dec had been sworn before a family friend of the maker thereof, said family friend might be hearing from the local Advisory Committee.
ReplyDeleteIt is well understood why judicial office holders should disqualify themselves where there might be a reasonable perception of bias in the exercise of a judicial discretion concerning a person known to them. However, I’ve been unable to work out what the mischief would be in hearing a stat dec in such circumstances. Can anyone explain?
DeleteGuidance clearly states that they should never be signed at home and must be made at Court where they can be checked, recorded, a fee charged and the court seal affixed to the document.
ReplyDeleteChapter and verse please.
DeleteThis comes from 'THE MAGISTRATE AT HOME - A GUIDE FOR MAGISTRATES IN LONDON ON OUT OF HOURS WARRANT APPLICATIONS - Updated October 2013' which, I believe, was issued by the London Justices' Clerks - though I imagine similar documents may have been issued in other parts of the country.
DeleteBut this wasn't a warrant, but rather a simple Stat.Dec. The guidance is irrelevant in this case.
DeleteThe full text reads:
Delete"DOCUMENTS FOR SIGNING
As a magistrate you may be approached at home and be asked to sign a number of documents which state they can be witnessed by a justice of the peace including statutory declarations.
Although statutory declarations and other forms can be witnessed by a magistrate, these SHOULD NEVER be signed at home. These applications must be made at a Court where the documents can be correctly checked for authenticity, recorded, a fee charged and the court seal affixed to the document."
Well, the bureaucratic walking algorithms didn't like that, did they ?
ReplyDeleteHi, can you explain what a walking algorithm is
DeleteIt's how you determine how to walk; typically in the field of robotics.
Deleteso replace "walking algorithms" with "robots"
Where is this guidance? Why should a justice, in exercise of his authority, and mindful of his oath, need a simple attestation of a signature to be 'checked and recorded'. And as for the fee, where is that in the judicial oath?
ReplyDeleteThere is no fee for a stat dec relating to criminal proceedings. Following the Redbridge fiasco a few years ago HMCTS have now tightened up their system. The Criminal Pr Rules now require the court to take a plea as soon as a stat dec is made. Mr Bystander can expect a quiet word from his JC (no coffee). Skeleton staffing at hearing centres means punters will always be directed to the Admin Centre. Can still be done at local solicitors for a small fee and then served on the Court though this increases the risk of things going awry and a plea hearing will still be needed.
ReplyDeleteYes, a quiet word from the JC, perhaps – but the JC would need to tread carefully. In Bystander’s defence, I can see nothing to suggest he has in any way gone wrong in law. The CPR requirement is for the plea to be taken when the defendant serves the declaration on the court - not when he makes it. In the same way as it does for solicitors, the law continues to empower JPs to witness statutory declarations away from the courthouse.
DeleteAccordingly, the JCs’ ‘MAGISTRATE AT HOME’ guidance I refer to above seems to have been worded too strongly in saying these applications must be made at a Court. Possibly it would be better to see this as an earnest request made in the interests of good administration rather than as an instruction.
Since these can also be signed by the family solicitor, the walking algorithms are irrational.
ReplyDeleteTony, I really would appreciate understanding the reference to walking algorithms.
DeleteThanks
Worth saying that any solicitor can also sign a Stat Dec and only charge £5!
ReplyDelete