What was the substantive issue in Halborg V Apple?
<p>The case has become overshadowed by a procedural issue about solicitors’ agency which was prominently appealed with the result that I cannot find anything describing the original substantive dispute in search results.</p>
<p>Procedural appeal: <a href="https://www.lpc-law.co.uk/media/no2bbwlr/f4qz598c-halborg-v-apple-approved-judgment-3-5-22.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.lpc-law.co.uk/media/no2bbwlr/f4qz598c-halborg-v-apple-approved-judgment-3-5-22.pdf</a></p>

<p>According to the linked judgment dated 3 May 2022, the underlying small claim was listed for 30 May that year. The issue is described in paragraph 3 as:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The underlying claim is in relation to a mobile phone which Mr Halborg purchased from the Second Defendant and which he alleges was defective.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>(the Second Defendant is O2)</p>
<p>As a small claim, we would not expect there to be a published judgment or any media coverage, which accounts for the lack of information on search results.</p>
<p>As a non-party to the case it is possible to request certain details from the court, including the statement of claim and the text of any orders. There is also the possibility of obtaining a transcript of the proceedings, since there apparently was a hearing and these are routinely recorded. Note that although the linked document says a hearing was meant to happen on 30 May, it's also possible that this was abandoned, rescheduled, etc.</p>
<p>It would probably be more effective - certainly faster and cheaper - to contact the claimant directly and ask about it, if you are really curious.</p>

england-and-wales legal-research