Case chaos
ACS Law's actions have been branded ‘remarkable' and ‘unprecedented' by a judge after the controversial firm's owner failed to attend a hearing and it declared its intention to keep pursuing suspected unlawful file-sharers.
The judge was irked by ACS:Law's owner, Andrew Crossley's lack of attendance at an ordered hearing that took place in the Patents County Court in London yesterday, to work out how cases brought by the firm against alleged file-sharers should be handled going-forward, according to TorrentFreak.
ACS:Law had apparently claimed it had no reservations about going to the hearing but last week dropped all its 27 active file-sharing cases and then Crossley was a no-show because of ‘an unfortunate family accident'.
According to another report from Torrent Freak, Judge Birss QC said he was ‘frankly astonished' by ACS:Law's behaviour, labeling it ‘remarkable' and 'unprecedented' while defense lawyers reportedly took the opportunity to attack the controversial firm's conduct.
While it seems clear that ACS:Law has failed to impress members of the legal community, it is not the end of the story for those people accused of unlawfully sharing files.
The story reportedly goes, that ACS:Law's business partner called MediaCAT that claims to have rights for movies, tried to stop the legal proceedings last week, with the 27 defendants receiving a letter that the law firm would discontinue the case against them.
Upon receiving the letter many of the defendants presumably breathed a big sigh of relief and reportedly did not head to court for the hearing, believing that the case was over, yet MediaCAT could not drop the claims without the court's permission, therefore confusing the defendants whose case was still on.
Apparently Crossley sent MediaCAT's counsel to seek an adjournment of the proceedings in his absence and somewhat bizarrely, ACS:Law reportedly declared its intention to re-file the cases against the 27 alleged file-sharers after errors had been corrected that were present when they were originally filed.
Birss reportedly said he was ‘astonished' at the idea of re-filing cases, especially as 5 defendants had filed their defenses and apparently said the action was "unprecedented in my personal experience and career at the bar."
It would now appear that ACS:Law's actions has plunged the case into uncharted territory and the judge discontinued one of the defendant's cases at his discretion but refused 26 others.
In the messy hearing, Crossley was reportedly accused of breaching the solicitor's code of conduct, while some of the defendants' lawyers are apparently seeking ‘wasted costs'.
The judge reportedly reckons that 2 further hearings will probably be needed and the hearing is believed to be scheduled for 24 January.
