KB-2024-001295 - [2025] EWHC 3000 (KB)

D2 and D3 did not attend, nor were they represented at, the 9 June 2025 hearing. CPR Part 8 makes no express provision for the hearing of a Part 8 claim in the absence of a defendant. I indicated my provisional view that this hearing was more akin to a trial than to the hearing of an application under CPR 23. Mr Pons agreed with that analysis.

On that basis, it is relevant that under CPR 39.3(1), the court may proceed with a trial in the absence of a party. Whether a court should exercise this power is a matter of discretion. In exercising its discretion, the court will have regard to the overriding objective.

Here, as set out above, both D2 and D3 have been served with the relevant documents. Correspondence showed that they had both been informed of the date of the hearing in good time, on 21 March 2025, and again on 22 May 2025. Neither has engaged with the proceedings beyond D2 completing an A of S indicating that he does not intend to contest the claim.

In those circumstances I was satisfied that D2 and D3 were both aware of the hearing and had chosen not to attend, thereby waiving their right to be represented and present at the hearing. I therefore decided to proceed in their absence, adopting the same approach to that taken by Cockerill J on similar facts in Banca Nazionale del Lavoro SpA v Catanzaro [2023] EWHC 3309 (Comm)).