1 Organization

Question 1

PD 2B para 7A: A deputy High Court Judge, a Master or District Judge may not try:

Answer 1

A deputy High Court Judge, a Master or District Judge may not try –

(1) a case in a claim made in respect of a judicial act under the Human Rights Act 1998, or
(2) a claim for a declaration of incompatibility in accordance with section 4 of the Human Rights Act 1998.

Question 2

PD7A para 3.6: If a claim for damages or for an unspecified sum is started in the High Court, the claim form must:

Answer 2

If a claim for damages or for an unspecified sum is started in the High Court, the claim form must:

(1) state that the claimant expects to recover more than £25,000 (or £50,000 or more if the claim is for personal injuries) or
(2) state that some enactment provides that the claim may only be commenced in the High Court and specify that enactment or
(3) state that the claim is to be in one of the specialist High Court lists (see CPR Parts 49 and 58–62) and specify that list.

Question 3

r30.5: Transfer between Divisions and to and from a specialist list

Answer 3

(1) The High Court may order proceedings in any Division of the High Court to be transferred to another Division.
(2) A judge dealing with claims in a specialist list may order proceedings to be transferred to or from that list.
(3) An application for the transfer of proceedings to or from a specialist list must be made to a judge dealing with claims in that list

Question 4

r60.6: All TCC cases are allocated to which track

Answer 4

(1) All TCC claims are treated as being allocated to the multi-track

Question 5

r26.8(1): When deciding the track for a claim, the matters to which the court shall have regard include

Answer 5

(a) the financial value, if any, of the claim;
(b) the nature of the remedy sought;
(c) the likely complexity of the facts, law or evidence;
(d) the number of parties or likely parties;
(e) the value of any counterclaim or other Part 20 claim and the complexity of any matters relating to it;
(f) the amount of oral evidence which may be required;
(g) the importance of the claim to persons who are not parties to the proceedings;
(h) the views expressed by the parties; and
(i) the circumstances of the parties

Question 6

r26.8(2): It is for the court to assess the financial value of a claim and in doing so it will disregard

Answer 6

(a) any amount not in dispute;
(b) any claim for interest;
(c) costs; and
(d) any contributory negligence.

Question 7

r26.8(3): if 2 or more claimants, court will assess financial value of claims separately if

Answer 7

(a) two or more claimants have started a claim against the same defendant using the same claim form; and
(b) each claimant has a claim against the defendant separate from the other claimants,

Question 8

PD26 para 7.4: In deciding, for the purposes of rule 26.8(2), whether an amount is in dispute the court will apply the following general principles

Answer 8

(1) Any amount for which the defendant does not admit liability is in dispute,
(2) Any sum in respect of an item forming part of the claim for which judgment has been entered (for example a summary judgment) is not in dispute,
(3) Any specific sum claimed as a distinct item and which the defendant admits he is liable to pay is not in dispute,
(4) Any sum offered by the defendant which has been accepted by the claimant in satisfaction of any item which forms a distinct part of the claim is not in dispute.

It follows from these provisions that if, in relation to a claim the value of which is above the small claims track limit of £10,000, the defendant makes, before allocation, an admission that reduces the amount in dispute to a figure below £10,000, the normal track for the claim will be the small claims track. As to recovery of pre-allocation costs, the claimant can, before allocation, apply for judgment with costs on the amount of the claim that has been admitted.

Question 9

r26.7(2): If claim has no financial value, how does court allocate the claim

Answer 9

The court will allocate a claim which has no financial value to the track which it considers most suitable having regard to the matters mentioned in rule 26.8(1).

Question 10

PD26 para 7.7: How will the court assess the value of any counterclaim or other Part 20 claim, in determining how to allocate the main claim

Answer 10

Where the case involves more than one money claim (for example where there is a Part 20 claim or there is more than one claimant each making separate claims) the court will not generally aggregate the claims. Instead it will generally regard the largest of them as determining the financial value of the claims.

Question 11

PD26 para 7.5: Impact of the views expressed by the parties when allocating a claim

Answer 11

The court will treat these views as an important factor, but the allocation decision is one for the court, to be taken in the light of all the circumstances, and the court will not be bound by any agreement or common view of the parties.

Question 12

r26.6(3): small claims track normal value

Answer 12

Subject to paragraph (1), the small claims track is the normal track for any claim which has a value of not more than £10,000.

Question 13

r26.6(1)(a) and (2): When are PI claims on small claims track

Answer 13

(1) The small claims track is the normal track for–
(a) any claim for personal injuries where –
(i) the value of the claim is not more than £10,000; and
(ii) the value of any claim for damages for personal injuries is not more than £1,000;

(Rule 2.3 defines ‘claim for personal injuries’ as proceedings in which there is a claim for damages in respect of personal injuries to the claimant or any other person or in respect of a person’s death)

(2) For the purposes of paragraph (1) ‘damages for personal injuries’ means damages claimed as compensation for pain, suffering and loss of amenity and does not include any other damages which are claimed.

Question 14

r26.6(1)(b): When are claims by residential tenant against a landlord allocated to the small claims track

Answer 14

(1) The small claims track is the normal track for–
(b) any claim which includes a claim by a tenant of residential premises against a landlord where –
(i) the tenant is seeking an order requiring the landlord to carry out repairs or other work to the premises (whether or not the tenant is also seeking some other remedy);
(ii) the cost of the repairs or other work to the premises is estimated to be not more than £1,000; and
(iii) the value of any other claim for damages is not more than £1,000.

Question 15

r26.7(4): Exception to residential tenants being assigned to the small claims track, even if criteria in r26.6(1)(b) are met

Answer 15

The court will not allocate a claim to the small claims track, if it includes a claim by a tenant of residential premises against his landlord for a remedy in respect of harassment or unlawful eviction.

Question 16

PD26 para 8.1(1)(d): any dispute involving this will not be suitable for small claims track

Answer 16

A case involving a disputed allegation of dishonesty will not usually be suitable for the small claims track.

Question 17

r27.5: Expert evidence on the small claims track

Answer 17

No expert may give evidence, whether written or oral, at a hearing without the permission of the court

Question 18

PD26 para 8.1(2): Is small claims track possible if above limit values?

Answer 18

The court may allocate to the small claims track a claim, the value of which is above the limits mentioned in rule 26.6(2). The court will not normally allow more than one day for the hearing of such a claim.

Question 19

r26.6(4): Fast track normal values

Answer 19

(4) Subject to paragraph (5), the fast track is the normal track for any claim –
(a) for which the small claims track is not the normal track; and
(b) which has a value –
(i) for proceedings issued on or after 6th April 2009, of not more than £25,000; and
(ii) for proceedings issued before 6th April 2009, of not more than £15,000.

Question 20

r26.6(5): Time and expert bounds of the fast track

Answer 20

(5) The fast track is the normal track for the claims referred to in paragraph (4) only if the court considers that –
(a) the trial is likely to last for no longer than one day; and
(b) oral expert evidence at trial will be limited to–
(i) one expert per party in relation to any expert field; and
(ii) expert evidence in two expert fields.

Question 21

PD26 para 9.1(3)(c): If trial longer than time limit, can it stay in fast track

Answer 21

The possibility that a trial might last longer than one day is not necessarily a conclusive reason for the court to allocate or to re-allocate a claim to the multi-track.

Question 22

r26.6(6): normal criteria for multi-track

Answer 22

The multi-track is the normal track for any claim for which the small claims track or the fast track is not the normal track.

Question 23

r8.9(c): If Part 8, what is the track allocation

Answer 23

Where the Part 8 procedure is followed the claim shall be treated as allocated to the multi-track and therefore Part 26 does not apply.

Question 24

PD8B para 17.1: If Part 8, Stage 3 RTA protocol case, what is the track allocation

Answer 24

The claim will not be allocated to a track. Parts 26 to 29 do not apply.

Question 25

r1.1(1) and (2): overriding objective

Answer 25

(1) These Rules are a new procedural code with the overriding objective of enabling the court to deal with cases justly and at proportionate cost.

(2) Dealing with a case justly and at proportionate cost includes, so far as is practicable –
(a) ensuring that the parties are on an equal footing;
(b) saving expense;
(c) dealing with the case in ways which are proportionate –
(i) to the amount of money involved;
(ii) to the importance of the case;
(iii) to the complexity of the issues; and
(iv) to the financial position of each party;
(d) ensuring that it is dealt with expeditiously and fairly;
(e) allotting to it an appropriate share of the court’s resources, while taking into account the need to allot resources to other cases; and
(f) enforcing compliance with rules, practice directions and orders.

Question 26

r1.2: The court must seek to give effect to the overriding objective when it -

Answer 26

The court must seek to give effect to the overriding objective when it –

(a) exercises any power given to it by the Rules; or
(b) interprets any rule subject to rules 76.2, 79.2 and 80.2 and 82.2.

Question 27

r1.3: Duty of parties regarding the overriding objective

Answer 27

The parties are required to help the court to further the overriding objective

Question 28

r1.4: Active case management includes -

Answer 28

(1) The court must further the overriding objective by actively managing cases.

(2) Active case management includes –
(a) encouraging the parties to co-operate with each other in the conduct of the proceedings;
(b) identifying the issues at an early stage;
(c) deciding promptly which issues need full investigation and trial and accordingly disposing summarily of the others;
(d) deciding the order in which issues are to be resolved;
(e) encouraging the parties to use an alternative dispute resolution(GL)procedure if the court considers that appropriate and facilitating the use of such procedure;
(f) helping the parties to settle the whole or part of the case;
(g) fixing timetables or otherwise controlling the progress of the case;
(h) considering whether the likely benefits of taking a particular step justify the cost of taking it;
(i) dealing with as many aspects of the case as it can on the same occasion;
(j) dealing with the case without the parties needing to attend at court;
(k) making use of technology; and
(l) giving directions to ensure that the trial of a case proceeds quickly and efficiently.

Question 29

PD16, para 15.1: A party who seeks to rely on any provision of or right arising under the Human Rights Act 1998 or seeks a remedy available under that Act must –

Answer 29

(1) must state that fact in his statement of case; and

(2) must in his statement of case –
(a) give precise details of the Convention right which it is alleged has been infringed and details of the alleged infringement;
(b) specify the relief sought;
(c) state if the relief sought includes–
(i) a declaration of incompatibility in accordance with section 4 of that Act, or
(ii) damages in respect of a judicial act to which section 9(3) of that Act applies;
(d) where the relief sought includes a declaration of incompatibility in accordance with section 4 of that Act, give precise details of the legislative provision alleged to be incompatible and details of the alleged incompatibility;
(e) where the claim is founded on a finding of unlawfulness by another court or tribunal, give details of the finding; and
(f) where the claim is founded on a judicial act which is alleged to have infringed a Convention right of the party as provided by section 9 of the Human Rights Act 1998, the judicial act complained of and the court or tribunal which is alleged to have made it.
(Practice Direction 19A provides for notice to be given and parties joined in the circumstances referred to in (c), (d) and (f))

Question 30

r 39.1 and 2: Rules relating to public hearings

Answer 30

(1) The general rule is that a hearing is to be in public.
(2) The requirement for a hearing to be in public does not require the court to make special arrangements for accommodating members of the public.

Question 31

r 7.11: Where can an HRA 1998, s7(1)(a) and any other HRA claims be brought

Answer 31

(1) A claim under section 7(1)(a) of the Human Rights Act 1998 in respect of a judicial act may be brought only in the High Court.
(2) Any other claim under section 7(1)(a) of that Act may be brought in any court.

Question 32

r19.4A(3) and(4): If claim made under s9 HRA 1998 -

Answer 32

(3) Where a claim is made under that Act for damages in respect of a judicial act –
(a) that claim must be set out in the statement of case or the appeal notice; and
(b) notice must be given to the Crown.

(4) Where paragraph (3) applies and the appropriate person has not applied to be joined as a party within 21 days, or such other period as the court directs, after the notice is served, the court may join the appropriate person as a party.

Question 33

r 19.4A(1) and (2): Limits on s4 HRA incompatibility

Answer 33

(1) The court may not make a declaration of incompatibility in accordance with section 4 of the Human Rights Act 1998 unless 21 days’ notice, or such other period of notice as the court directs, has been given to the Crown.
(2) Where notice has been given to the Crown a Minister, or other person permitted by that Act, shall be joined as a party on giving notice to the court.

Question 34

PD19A para 6.1, 2 and 3: If a party includes s4 HRA 1998 issue (including if amended), then

Answer 34

6. 1 Where a party has included in his statement of case –
   (1) a claim for a declaration of incompatibility in accordance with section 4 of the Human Rights Act 1998, or
   (2) an issue for the court to decide which may lead to the court considering making a declaration,

then the court may at any time consider whether notice should be given to the Crown as required by that Act and give directions for the content and service of the notice. The rule allows a period of 21 days before the court will make the declaration but the court may vary this period of time.

6. 2 The court will normally consider the issues and give the directions referred to in paragraph 6.1 at the case management conference.
7. 3 Where a party amends his statement of case to include any matter referred to in paragraph 6.1, then the court will consider whether notice should be given to the Crown and give directions for the content and service of the notice.

Question 35

r30.3(2)(g):In considering transfer to High Court, must factor, re s4 HRA

Answer 35

whether the making of a declaration of incompatibility under section 4 of the Human Rights Act 1998 has arisen or may arise;

Question 36

r33.9: For s7 HRA 1998, rules if infringement already found in another court

Answer 36

1) This rule applies where a claim is –
(a) for a remedy under section 7 of the Human Rights Act 1998 in respect of a judicial act which is alleged to have infringed the claimant’s Article 5 Convention rights; and
(b) based on a finding by a court or tribunal that the claimant’s Convention rights have been infringed.
(2) The court hearing the claim –
(a) may proceed on the basis of the finding of that other court or tribunal that there has been an infringement but it is not required to do so, and
(b) may reach its own conclusion in the light of that finding and of the evidence heard by that other court or tribunal.

Question 37

PD39A para 8.1: Rules on s2 HRA 1998 citations

Answer 37

If it is necessary for a party to give evidence at a hearing of an authority referred to in section 2 of the Human Rights Act 1998–
(1) the authority to be cited should be an authoritative and complete report; and
(2) the party must give to the court and any other party a list of the authorities he intends to cite and copies of the reports not less than three days before the hearing.
(Section 2(1) of the Human Rights Act 1998 requires the court to take into account the authorities listed there)
(3) Copies of the complete original texts issued by the European Court and Commission either paper based or from the Court’s judgment database (HUDOC), which is available on the Internet, may be used.