This was an appeal by the defendant from an order of Judge Hull QC in which he refused Katra's challenge to an order confirming a previous strike-out order. The claimant was seeking to recover the sum of £2,789.63 in respect of building works, by arguing that the quality of the work was not satisfactory. The parties agreed to appoint a single joint expert on 17 April 2003. The parties could not agree the terms of a joint instruction letter. District Judge Enzer ordered Katra to sign the letter of joint instruction, even though that letter had been prepared by the claimant. Katra deleted two sentences relating to the case background and then signed the letter. District Judge Enzer considered that Katra had not complied with the order and as a result struck out the defence and counterclaim. There was then an unfortunate sequence of events whereby Katra sought to apply to and/or appeal until Judge Hull confirmed the strike-out order.
Katra sought to argue that there was no rule that a party should be bound by the instructions to a joint expert given by the other side.