A complete record of every Form EX107 transcript application filed by the Applicant. 8 applications have been made across 2 courts. 0 transcripts have been provided. The earliest application was filed on 18 September 2024. As of 2026-03-21, the Applicant has been waiting 573+ days for the first transcript.
On 20 December 2024, the Applicant filed EX107-007 requesting the transcript of the hearing before DDJ Wood in case BL-2024-001166 (former County Court ref L10CL352) at the Central London County Court.
The court returned the application with a handwritten note stating:
'Mr Darius'. Section A10 'incorrect'.The Applicant's name is Michael Darius Eastwood. 'Darius' is his middle name. The court addressed him by his middle name as though it were his surname, then rejected the form on the basis that section A10 was 'incorrect'. No further explanation was given. The same form, with the same details, was resubmitted as EX107-008 on 19 August 2025 and has received no response.
This is the only transcript application across all courts that received any response at all. The response was to get the Applicant's name wrong and reject the form without proper reason.
The transcripts contain evidence of judicial errors and are needed for the declarations of voidness. The court is withholding the evidence needed to prove misconduct. Without transcripts, the Applicant cannot demonstrate to the Court of Appeal exactly what was said, what procedural errors occurred, or what directions were given at each hearing.
Under CPR PD 52C paragraph 5.12, an appellant who seeks to challenge a finding of fact must provide a transcript or an approved note of the relevant evidence. The burden is placed on the Applicant to obtain transcripts. Yet the court's own administrative system is failing to process the applications.
8 applications. 0 transcripts. 6 applications ignored entirely. 2 obstructed with procedural errors by the court itself. This is not an administrative delay. This is a systematic failure to provide the evidence necessary for a fair hearing.
The Applicant is a litigant in person with ADHD and autism (Equality Act 2010 s.6, Reasonable Adjustment reference 67862925). The court's failure to process EX107 applications represents a failure to make reasonable adjustments and a denial of the right to a fair hearing under Article 6 ECHR.
HHJ Kelly withheld the full hearing transcript for KB-2024-001508. Only a judgment-only transcript was released, and it was revised by the judge before release. A judgment-only transcript excludes all exchanges, submissions, and procedural decisions from the hearing itself. The judge who conducted the hearing then controlled the only written record of it.
The full transcript would have recorded: the tears, the mother's intervention, the defendant speaking first on the applicant's own application, the undertaking demand before Michael spoke, the ADHD processing delay treated as refusal, and the counter-injunction granted before the applicant opened his mouth.
The Administrative Notice (para 8E) establishes a transcript precondition: no substantive determination of any matter under CA-2024-001353 should take place until full hearing transcripts have been provided. This is grounded in:
Lord Justice Dove determined the Kelly PTA on 24 March 2026 without transcripts. That must not happen again. The court cannot withhold transcripts and then determine matters on the basis of an incomplete record.
Form EX107 is the standard HMCTS form for requesting a transcript of court proceedings. The requirements are:
The form is submitted to the court where the hearing took place. The court should then instruct an approved transcription service. There is no formal time limit for processing, but HMCTS guidance suggests transcripts should be provided within 10 working days of the request being approved.
The form is available from GOV.UK (Form EX107).
Michael Darius Eastwood
Litigant in Person | ADHD + ASD (EA 2010 s.6) | RA Ref: 67862925
Data updated: 2026-03-21