Counterclaim meaning

This Checklist on making a Part 36 offer identifies the key factors that should be considered when drafting a Part 36 offer. Consideration What a Part 36 offer can be made in relation to You may frame a Part 36 offer to cover the entirety of the claim, a defined part, or a particular issue. It can likewise address a counterclaim or any additional claim, and it may extend to an appeal or cross-appeal arising from a trial judgment. However, a Part 36 offer is not available for an appeal against an interlocutory ruling. Guidance When to make a Part 36 offer An offer under Part 36 can be served at any point, whether before proceedings are issued or once they are underway (CPR 36.7(1)). Where a matter proceeds to appeal, a new Part 36 offer should be advanced because the Part 36 consequences attach only to the costs of the proceedings in which the offer is made, and do not extend to the...

Before commencing the arbitration Check limits; confirm SIAC clause; interim relief; tribunal size; proper nominations. Emergency measures Seek Emergency Arbitrator pre-constitution; urgent, Registrar-approved, binding relief. Expedited Procedure Apply pre-constitution; expect sole arbitrator, streamlined process, six‑month award. Commencing the arbitration Serve Notice on Registrar/respondent with required particulars, funding statement, fee. Responding to the arbitration Respond within 14 days; address claims, jurisdiction and counterclaims. Jurisdiction Arbitration proceeds unless screened; tribunal rules; object under Rule 31. Preliminary meeting and directions Attend administrative calls; hold early case management conference. Written statements File Claim, Defence, Counterclaim as directed; state facts, grounds, relief. Evidence Tribunal controls evidence; written testimony allowed; oral examination on request. The hearing Any party may...

In this issue: Advertising, marketing and sponsorship Contracts International Public procurement Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Latest Q&A Commercial Highlights 2025/2026 Advertising, marketing and sponsorship ASA rulings—17 December 2025 The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) received six objections about adverts for weight-loss medicines and services, covering promotion of prescription-only medicines, irresponsible body-image messaging and gender stereotyping, plus assertions that a medicine assists beyond its authorised indication. The ASA upheld the complaints. See: LNB News 17/12/2025 20. Which? finds budget airlines’ cabin bag fees far higher than advertised Consumer's Association (Which?) carried out research into budget airline bag pricing, finding that major carriers such as RyanAir and Easyjet routinely fail to include in the advertised total the realistic cost of baggage. Which? has referred its findings to the ASA for misleading 'from' price claims and the ASA is investigating. See: LNB News 15/12/2025 14....

Fujifilm Corporation v Kodak Holding GmbH and others, UPC_CFI_355/2023 Case background Fujifilm Corporation has brought proceedings against a number of Kodak entities, alleging breaches of multiple European patents covering offset printing technology. Two suits were commenced in the UPC’s Mannheim Local Division, and a further action (ACT_578607/2023; UPC_CFI_355/2023) was lodged with the Düsseldorf Local Division concerning the purported infringement of EP3594009. In that latter matter, Kodak responded with a counterclaim seeking revocation. At the time, the European patent was effective in Germany and the UK, and all litigants were domiciled in Germany, a UPC contracting member state. Decision of the Düsseldorf Local Division Ruling on the dispute, the Düsseldorf Local Division held the European patent invalid under the European Patent Convention (EPC), after refusing Fujifilm’s proposed amendments. It acknowledged it lacked competence to set aside the UK part of the patent—so that portion remains in force—whereas the German part of the patent was revoked...

In this issue: Business tenancies Disputes and remedies Property Disputes in Scotland LexTalk®Property Disputes: a Lexis®Nexis community Additional Property disputes updates Daily and weekly news alerts Dates for your diary New and updated content Trackers Latest Q&A Business tenancies Competing approaches to a tenant’s ‘holding’ in claims for renewal of business tenancies (Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Ltd v Medley Assets Ltd) In Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Ltd v Medley Assets Ltd [2024] Lexis Citation 358, a contested application to renew a business tenancy under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (LTA 1954) was examined. The landlord relied on ground (f), asserting a reasonable need to recover possession to undertake substantial works. A key ancillary question concerned the scope of the tenant’s ‘holding’, hinging on how that term is construed in LTA 1954, s 30, and whether it aligns with or differs from ‘holding’ in LTA 1954, s 32 (the property to be included in any new tenancy)....

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. It is provided for background information only. The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) is an independent regulatory organisation supervising the US securities market. As part of its remit, FINRA runs the securities industry’s largest dispute resolution forum. It addresses financial and commercial disagreements between investors, brokerage firms and individual brokers, as well as disputes within and between brokerage firms and brokers. Matters are resolved through FINRA’s own arbitration process. FINRA maintains two Codes of Arbitration Procedure: the Code of Arbitration Procedure for Customer Disputes (the Customer Code or Section 12000 of the FINRA Rules), which governs arbitrations between investors and industry participants, and the Code of Arbitration Procedure for Industry Disputes (the Industry Code or Section 13000 of the FINRA Rules), which governs arbitrations between industry parties This note relates to costs under both Codes. Filing fees Any party bringing a claim—including a counterclaim, a cross-claim or a...

Precedent Summary Letter of claim—patent infringement This Precedent provides an outline letter of claim, the expression presently used in the Civil Procedure Rules, and is often described as a letter before action or a cease and desist letter. It concerns alleged patent infringement. The accompanying Drafting Notes set out how to strike a balance between the Practice Direction Pre-Action Conduct and Protocols obligations for a letter of claim and the unjustified threats provisions in section 70 of the Patents Act 1977. They also include suggested draft undertakings. Particulars of Claim—patent infringement claim This is a Precedent Particulars of Claim intended for use in a patent infringement action...

This Practice Note sets out summaries of costs judgments where the court declined to order indemnity costs. It identifies the principal question determined in each matter and offers observations on the ruling. Every matter is fact-specific; accordingly, these decisions are intended only to illuminate the court’s approach and should not be treated as precedents for how the courts will proceed in any particular circumstance. For examples of cases where indemnity costs were allowed, see Practice Note: Indemnity costs permitted—illustrative decisions. For guidance on indemnity costs orders, see Practice Note: Indemnity costs orders—principles. Indemnity costs refused Case and citation: Gagliardi v Evolution Capital Management LLC [2025] EWHC 3488 (Comm) Issue: Whether indemnity costs ought to be ordered against the defendant because the substance of its defence and counterclaim took the dispute outside the norm. Comment: As to indemnity costs, it was observed that, considering the conduct of the proceedings overall, this was a hard-fought Commercial Court matter where both parties could, at points, have...

1 Sub-Contractor warranties and undertakings The Sub-Contractor warrants and undertakes that it has complied with, and will continue to comply with, all terms and obligations required of it under the Sub-Contract; to the extent it undertakes any design for the Sub-Contract Works, it has exercised, and will continue to exercise, the reasonable skill, care and diligence expected of a properly qualified and competent architect or other suitable professional designer experienced on projects of equivalent scope, type, size, nature and complexity to the Works. The Sub-Contractor’s obligations under this Memorandum are neither wider nor longer in duration than those owed to the Contractor under the Sub-Contract; in any action it may rely upon any limitation and equivalent defences available thereunder as if the Beneficiary were a joint employer with the Contractor, save that it may not exercise any right of set-off or counterclaim. The Sub-Contractor’s obligations under or by virtue of paragraph 1 shall not...

Case No. [ insert claim number ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS OF ENGLAND & WALES INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LIST (ChD) [ INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ENTERPRISE COURT (IPEC) OR PATENTS COURT ] BETWEEN: [ insert full name of claimant ] Claimant and [ insert full name of defendant ] Defendant REPLY AND DEFENCE TO COUNTERCLAIM REPLY Preliminary Points Unless indicated otherwise, in this Reply and Defence to Counterclaim any paragraph references are to those in the Defence and Counterclaim. The Claimant contests the Defendant’s allegations and contentions in the Defence and Counterclaim in their entirety, except to the extent that they amount to admissions. The Claimant's Rights Registered Design Paragraph 5 is denied. The Registered Design is neither currently nor at any material time has been invalid for the reasons advanced in the Defence and Counterclaim [ and/or in the Grounds of Invalidity...

Case No: [ insert claim number ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICEBUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS OF ENGLAND and WALESINTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LIST (ChD)[ INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ENTERPRISE COURT (IPEC) ] BETWEEN:[ insert full name of Claimant ] Claimantand[ insert full name of Defendant ] Defendant DEFENCE AND COUNTERCLAIM DEFENCE Unless otherwise stated, paragraph references are to the Particulars of Claim. The Defendant responds to the material allegations set out below. Any matter not expressly addressed in this Defence is required to be strictly proved by the Claimant. The Claimant Paragraphs 1–5 are admitted [ save that: ] 3.1 [ it is not admitted that the Claimant’s undertaking extends to, or includes, the provision of [ insert description of the scope of the claimant’s business that the claimant has pleaded but which the defendant does not admit the claimant is involved in ] ] ; AND/OR 3.2 it is not accepted that...

Background Part 20 exists to ensure counterclaims and other additional claims are handled in the most practical and efficient way (CPR 20). Claim The route for any counterclaim varies according to whether proceedings are under Part 7 or Part 8. A probate claim must be started under the Part 7 procedure (CPR 57.3(b)). For Part 57 purposes, a ‘probate claim’ covers an application for a decree affirming or denying the validity of a purported will (CPR 57.1(2)(a)(iii)). Counterclaim Where a defendant maintains that they have any claim concerning the grant of probate of the deceased person’s Will, they must advance that position by serving a counterclaim (CPR 57.8(1))...

Compulsory acquisition of landlord’s interest by tenants of flats Under Part III of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 (LTA 1987), qualifying long-lease flat owners may compel transfer of the landlord’s interest to a nominated person where: the landlord has breached duties to repair, maintain, insure or manage the building; or the building has been managed for at least two years by a manager appointed under LTA 1987, Part II. For criteria and procedure for an acquisition order, see Practice Note: Compulsory acquisition of landlord’s interest by tenants of flats. When deciding to bring an acquisition order as a standalone claim or within a defence and counterclaim, CPR 20.9 applies. The court considers whether to permit an additional claim, dismiss it, or require it be determined separately from the claimant’s claim. Factors may include: the connection between the additional claim and the claimant’s claim against the defendant; whether the additional claimant seeks substantially the same remedy...