Bank Notes

P - Pleadings

20/12/18

CARR v FORMATION GROUP PLC [2018] EWHC 3575

Considers the level of detail required to be included in a claim form to stop time running for the purposes of limitation. Details of any relevant contract must be given for a claim in contract and details of the essential acts or omissions constituting alleged breaches of duty or negligence. If the essential elements are set out, it is not necessary to identify the legal basis of the claim by naming the cause of action and the court can consider relevant background. For a claim in dishonest assistance, it is necessary for the claim form to state that the defendant acted dishonestly.

23/5/17

WILLERS v JOYCE [2017] EWHC 1225 (Ch)

Statements of case should be as concise as possible. It is not their function to 'tell the story' and over-lengthy statements of case are positively unhelpful for the purposes of case management. There may be instances where it is helpful to refer to particular items of evidence by way illustration, or to refer to authority, but normally it is far more helpful for a statement of case, and especially particulars of claim, to set out only the essential facts which are necessary to make out the cause or causes of action that are relied upon, broken down by reference to their constituent elements, and an explanation for the relief that is claimed. It is important that a clear distinction is made between the facts that are necessary to enable the defendant to understand the claim it has to meet and the facts upon which the claimant will wish to rely at the trial of the claim. All too often particulars of claim are a conflation of a statement of case and a witness statement [31].

20/2/15

TCHENGUIZ v GRANT THORNTON UK LLP [2015] EWHC 405 (Comm)

Stresses the need to keep pleadings in the Commercial Court within the 25 page limit specified in the Commercial Court Guide unless otherwise permitted by the court. Particulars of claim running to 94 pages were struck out and ordered to be re-pleaded within a 45 page limit.

2/7/14

DIL v COMMISSIONER OF POLICE OF THE METROPOLIS [2014] EWHC 2184 (QB)

There may be cases where on policy grounds a party can properly refuse to admit or deny an allegation and can be regarded as unable to admit or deny the fact within CPR r 16.5 [24]. On the facts, with the exception of information in relation to two individuals, there was no legitimate policy reason for the police commissioner to refuse to plead a positive defence.

30/10/13

GAMATRONIC (UK) LTD v HAMILTON [2013] EWHC 3287 (QB)

Contains guidance on drafting statements of case. They must be sufficiently accurate to identify the issues: parties should not have to dig behind a pleading to detect what is alleged [26]. Headings must be neutral and mere background should not be pleaded. Allegations, especially of dishonesty, should be properly particularsed.

2/10/13

CREDIT SUISSE AG v ARABIAN AIRCRAFT & EQUIPMENT LEASING CO EC [2013] EWCA Civ 1169

Where an aircraft leasing agreement provided alternative and inconsistent bases for the calculation of damages for breach, the claimant could not obtain summary judgment on the basis of a calculation on which it had not pleaded reliance. Particulars of claim should identify with care and precision the case the claimant is putting forward [17].

14/2/13

WHALLEY v PF DEVELOPMENTS LTD [2013] EWCA Civ 306

A judge had been wrong to refuse to award damages for certain consequential losses merely because those losses had not been pleaded. The losses had been covered in the claimant’s witness evidence so the defendant had been given adequate notice.