This overview covers how a court case commences, what brings the energy into the court case in order to have jurisdiction and what your mission should be.
Since a PERSON entity is nearly always involved and is the focus of this charging energy, then this is about the execution of contracts in commerce. If you are under the impression that no contract can exist without a signature (an express contract), then you still have a hill to climb to comprehend how contracts can operate in the world of commerce, who you are and your relationship to your PERSON legal entity.
But a signature is required on a contract for it to be valid right? I’m yet to find a restaurant that requires a patron to sign an express contract before one can order a meal, instead the contract of payment for a meal is implied by one’s action of sitting at a table and proceeding to make an order and consuming the meal. Actions define a contract (implied contract) and in some cases without a word ever been spoken or even a pen to paper.
Once the patron receives the charge for the meal, does one complain that there is no signed contract therefore no payment is due? What do you think is reasonable? You think refusing to pay for the meal is valid? You took a benefit right? I wonder how an adjudicator would decide?
Let’s move ahead and assume there is an implied contract as this seems reasonable in the case of a restaurant meal. A charge sheet is produced by the restaurant that describes precisely what the order consisted of. It is this open charge sheet that has the commercial energy to enforce a claim.
The patron can pay it using a payment method, perhaps even negotiate with the manager to work in the kitchen to pay it or, even better, a friend happens to walk by and offers to pay it. These methods extinguish the charge that the patron has incurred. The restaurant manager cannot put forth a claim if the charge has been extinguished (and there’s a record of the payment). A court cannot have jurisdiction if there is no controversy, hence the restaurant manager will not succeed with a claim if the charge no longer exists.
So how does this relate to a court case? Well, the implied transactional nature of contracting and paying for a meal are incredibly similar, what’s more, even the friend that paid for the meal can be used in settling the court charge as well. Now even better, the charge in a court case isn’t even directed at you, it’s directed at your person entity.
So why do people make all this fuss with court cases by complaining, yelling and screaming, and creating controversy? 1) It’s not against you, it’s against your person, 2) A friend of your person can discharge the debt, 3) You make all parties whole – sweet deal.
The Original Charging instrument has the energy in a court case. Without it, there can be no case. So shouldn’t the mission be to indorse this instrument (like a cheque) so the opposite party can cash it? Why waste time on anything else? From the private side you invite an accommodation party to setoff the Original Charging instrument. This can be you in the capacity as an accommodation party (bill of exchange act, legal definition, example) who will privately setoff the instrument. The original instrument will be in the court file, so you’ll need to inspect it and indorse the back. You may also need to privately resolve the situation with your person’s opposite party as well eg make a tender of payment for a loan so the loan is setoff also and the opposite party cannot re-establish a new case against your person.
Doesn’t it sound easier to make all parties whole so everyone is happy via some study? Less yelling and screaming is always a good start in my book. Extinguish the charge and it’s lights out.