Yes the claimant counsel has argued that I had behaved unreasonably and that I had a hopeless claim. The new judge had all the paper work and all my letters to the court and telephone calls I made to the court that it was indeed not me behaving unreasonably.
But the claimant said that I should have made them aware of my communications to the court. I didn't because I did not think asking the court about setting aside a case and inquiring about it was something that I should have made them aware.
Is that considered behaved unreasonably?
Also the judge also thought my case was not good enough to claim for compensation for damages so basically did think my counter claim was hopeless.
The other side had applied for striking out and it was stuck out.
If the judge decides I have not behaved unreasonably, then apparently, they can claim it under CPR 44.5, which does allow costs under contract.
How can I argue this as it seems they can claim it and there is nothing in CPR 26, to say they cannot apply this rule. CPR 44.3 seem to allow costs on indemnity basis. Is there any rule to state that these rules cannot override CPR 26?