Irish & Anor, Re

In a claim under the Presumption of Death Act 2013, the court may proceed directly from the compulsory directions hearing to disposal where the statutory and procedural requirements have been met, all necessary notifications and advertisements have occurred, and no person seeks to intervene. The power arises under the court’s case-management jurisdiction, particularly Civil Procedure Rules 1998, rule 3.1(2)(b) and (m). The course is discretionary and should not be taken where requirements remain outstanding, further directions are needed, or persons still require notification.

The claimants, the adult children of Leslie Roger Irish, issued a Part 8 claim under the Presumption of Death Act 2013 after he disappeared and could not be found. The claim was listed for the compulsory directions hearing required by Practice Direction 57B. By that hearing, the required notifications and newspaper advertisement had taken place, no person wished to intervene, and the claimants had prepared material suitable for final disposal.

The central procedural question was whether the court could move immediately from the directions hearing to a disposal hearing and determine the substantive claim on the same occasion.

1. Application granted and claim disposed of. The court exercised its case-management powers to hear and determine the substantive claim immediately after the compulsory directions hearing. The declaration sought under the Presumption of Death Act 2013 was made.
2. The procedure for claims under the Act is governed by rules 57.17 to 57.23 of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 and Practice Direction 57B. The compulsory directions hearing enables the court to check compliance with the statutory and procedural requirements and to give directions if anyone wishes to intervene.
3. The court did not rely on its own-initiative powers under rule 3.3. Instead, where the only parties are before the court and consent, and no other person seeks to participate, rule 3.1(2)(b) permits the court to bring forward a hearing and rule 3.1(2)(m) permits it to take any other case-management step or make any order needed to manage the claim and further the overriding objective.
4. It may therefore be appropriate to proceed straight to disposal where the matter is ready, all required notifications and advertisements have occurred, and no intervention is sought. This is not an automatic course. If statutory requirements remain unfulfilled, directions are still needed, or persons require notification, the claim should proceed to a final hearing in the usual way.