Mr Justice Mitting rules that Declan's claim is "not totally without merit"

As I wrote in the previous blog Will we get the internet back?, Declan had an oral hearing in the High Court last Tuesday of his claim in person against our jobcentre, Highgate Jobcentre Plus, for discrimination and harassment - formally through A4E and currently through Reed in Partnership. Highgate Jobcentre Plus is part of the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP). Mr Justice Mitting refused permission to apply for Judicial Review, but ruled that the claim was "not totally without merit" as soon as Counsel representing the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions raised the issue of costs. The first thing I did when Declan obtained a copy of Counsel's note of hearing last week was to check that this ruling was there. It was.

This afternoon Declan filed his claim with the Court of Appeal. This is his Skeleton Argument (the Grounds of Appeal can be found here) - MI5 whistleblower David Shayler, who lived in one of the rooms below us for a couple of years, is mentioned in paragraph 25 (there is a stunning photograph of Shayler aka Delores Kane in the previous blog):

This appeal will apparently be quite a challenge. The "Judgment", which sets out the reasons the Judge gave for his decision, was recorded but when Declan asked the Judge for the transcript at public expense, he was told that if he wanted it he would have to pay for it himself (an impossibility). Last week DWP Legal Services refused to provide Declan with a note of judgment approved by the Judge because the hearing was recorded. This afternoon Declan sought to reapply for the transcript but was refused a receipt for the application by the Civil Appeals Office.

This raises the question: If the person appealing a High Court ruling is on state benefits and cannot afford the cost of the transcript of judgment, does this mean he loses his case because the Lord Justice cannot read and therefore cannot understand the reasons why the Judge reached his decision?

Declan was told by the Civil Appeals Office that if he didn't want to apply for the transcript of judgment without a receipt, he should deal with his case manager, as soon as he is allocated one. Surely he will not be told by this case manager that his claim can go no further because he cannot afford to pay for the transcript. It would certainly make for a very strange application to the European Court of Human Rights - from a High Court judge ruling that the claim is not "Totally without Merit" to the end of the domestic line with a case manager in the Civil Appeals Office!