This Procedural Guide Sets out the process under the Debtors Act 1869 (DA 1869), the Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010), SI 2010/2955, Pt 33, and the Administration of Justice Act 1970 (AJA 1970) for applying for a judgment summons compelling a debtor to attend court where the debtor has, or has had since the date of the order or judgment, the means to meet the defaulted amount, yet refuses or neglects to do so. It provides guidance on eligibility to apply, the criminal standard of proof and evidential requirements, and the debtor’s committal. A judgment summons is a summons that requires a debtor to appear before the court. If it is proved to the court’s satisfaction that the debtor has, or has had since the order or judgment, the means to pay the sum in default, and has refused or neglected, or refuses or neglects, to pay it, the debtor may be committed to prison for up to six weeks, or until prior payment of the amount owing....

When a default judgment is recorded against a defendant, the court lacks discretion and is obliged to set it aside under CPR 13.2 if it was entered wrongly. Accordingly, it is therefore important to determine whether or not a defendant facing default judgment can pursue an application under CPR 13.2, even where they might also rely on CPR 13.3 to seek to have the judgment set aside on discretionary grounds...

Practice Note: Contract interpretation—distinguishing between liquidated damages and penalty clauses As highlighted in this Practice Note, working out whether a liquidated damages provision will be struck down as a penalty is seldom straightforward and often demands careful judgment. Although each dispute turns on the court’s construction of the contract, there are several points to weigh when examining the ambit of a supposed liquidated damages term and its potential exposure to a penalty challenge, both in substance and effect. When you are drafting such a clause, it is vital to keep these considerations in view, and to think about how it sits alongside connected provisions, including any related terms that operate with it. See: Drafting and negotiating a liquidated damages clause—checklist Precedent: Liquidated damages clause For targeted analysis of the way authorities have treated provisions in commercial agreements that stipulate ‘default interest’, see the following materials: Penalty interest rates in commercial contracts Contract interpretation—distinguishing between liquidated damages and penalty...

In this issue: Advertising, marketing and sponsorship Contracts Data protection Public procurement Sale and supply of goods Supply of services International Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Advertising, marketing and sponsorship ASA rulings— 8 May 2024. The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) considered a complaint about a website promoting a gambling offer that did not set out key entry conditions. The complainant queried whether the advertisement misled consumers. The ASA agreed and upheld the complaint. See: LNB News 08/05/2024 29. Contracts Supreme Court clarifies law on damages and assessment of goods (Sharp Corp Ltd (Respondent) v Viterra BV (previously known as Glencore Agriculture BV) (Appellant)). In Sharp Corp Ltd v Viterra BV (previously known as Glencore Agriculture BV) [2024] UKSC 14, the Supreme Court unanimously allowed the appeal and also allowed the cross-appeal, sending the Awards back to the Appeal Board for reconsideration. Lord...

Watford Control Instruments Ltd v Brown [2024] EWHC 1125 (Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? This judgment is notable for addressing the infrequently used basis for striking out proceedings for want of prosecution. It observes that the principal and best-known authority on the point, the House of Lords decision in Grovit v Doctor [1997] 1 WLR 640, predates the CPR. So too does a further case on the appropriate sanction when such want of prosecution is established, Board of Governors of the National Heart and Chest Hospital v Chettle (1998) 30 HLR 618. Nevertheless, the court confirms that the principles articulated in those authorities remain good law and have not been displaced by the advent of the CPR. Where the court is satisfied a claimant has ‘warehoused’ the case—issuing it, taking no steps to advance it, yet keeping it alive so it can be pursued later—and that this constitutes an abuse of process, the orthodox sanction is to strike out the claim. The judgment thereby...

In this issue: Key DR developments Claims and remedies Costs and funding Injunctions Litigation Applications—specific International guidance Dates for your diary Useful information Daily and weekly news alerts Key DR developments Court information HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has released a podcast featuring David Kerry and David Franks. It sets out the advantages of mediation and explains recent changes to the Small Claims Mediation Service, including how the service can deliver faster dispute resolution. For more detail, see: LNB News 15/08/2024 8—HMCTS releases podcast highlighting benefits of Small Claims Court Mediation Service. Claims and remedies Civil fraud—unlawful means conspiracy In Takhar v Gracefield Developments Ltd [2024] EWHC 1714 (Ch), after a judgment was set aside because the claim failed due to a forged document, the claimant used that same forgery to mount a fresh and successful claim for unlawful means conspiracy. Phillip Patterson, barrister at Gatehouse Chambers, considers the...

Practice Note This Practice Note sets out the full procedural guidance for court applications to renew or end a business tenancy, covers interim rent applications, and addresses Professional Arbitration on Court Terms (PACT)...

ARCHIVED : This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. This Note outlines the video hearings pilot that ran from 30 November 2018 to 30 November 2019, established by Practice Direction 51V. It allowed applications to set aside default judgments under CPR 12 to be dealt with by a video hearing. It applied only where the County Court had entered a default judgment for a specified sum of money. Use was optional; it proceeded only if all parties consented and had the necessary IT equipment. HMCTS released a newsletter giving details of the pilot. The 101st Practice Direction Update set out the pilot in its schedule. What is the purpose of the pilot scheme? The aim was to test a procedure for hearing applications to set aside default judgments entered under CPR 12 via an internet-enabled video link, to be referred to as a video hearing (Practice Direction 51V, para 1.2). The use of the video hearing...

This Practice Note explores how state immunity intersects with arbitration proceedings in Brazil. For a general introduction to state immunity and arbitration, see Practice Note: State immunity and arbitration—general considerations. For materials on state immunity across multiple jurisdictions worldwide (including England and Wales), refer to our ‘State immunity’ subtopic: State immunity and arbitration—overview. It also examines exceptions to absolute state immunity and waiver of immunity, both in general terms and as they arise in international arbitration... Concept of state immunity in Brazil State immunity is a customary rule of international law. Grounded in the equality of states, it embodies non-interference and respect for sovereignty. It holds that one state may not sit in judgment on another, as equals do not wield authority over each other. As a default position, this immunity shields a foreign state—including its governmental bodies, companies and agents—from being compelled to submit to the jurisdiction of another state’s courts... In Brazil, there is no specific legislation concerning state immunity. The concept is applied by...

[ Insert date ] [ Insert ] Employment Tribunal [ Insert address ] To the [ insert ] Employment Tribunal [ Insert name of case, eg X v Y ] Claim Number: [ insert claim number ] Rule 21(1) Application for an extension of time for presenting the response after the time limit has expired We apply on the Respondent’s behalf, under rules 5(7) and 21 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024, SI 2024/1155, for extra time to present the response. [ The Respondent’s draft response is enclosed with this application. OR The Respondent has been unable to attach its draft response because [ insert reasons ]. ] In addition to an extension, the Respondent asks the Tribunal to accept the response and to set aside any judgment entered under rule 22. The Respondent seeks an extension for the following reasons: [ insert reasons, eg: ] [ [ Example 1: ] Although the Tribunal sent the...

Filed on behalf of the Defendant Witness statement of [ insert initial and surname of witness ] Statement number: [ insert number of witness statement in relation to the witness ] Exhibits referenced: [ insert initials and number of each exhibit referred to ] Statement date: [ insert date ] [ Translation date: [ insert date ] ] Claim number: [ insert claim number ] [ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE [ BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS [ OF ENGLAND AND WALES OR IN [ insert location ] OR [ Specify division ] [ Specify specialist court ] [ Insert location ] DISTRICT REGISTRY THE COUNTY COURT AT [ insert location ] [ BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS LIST Between the parties: [ insert name ] as Claimant/Respondent and [ insert name ] as Defendant/Applicant [ NUMBER OF WITNESS STATEMENT EG FIRST ] witness statement of [ insert name of witness ] Submitted on behalf of the...

Claim No. add claim number...

Interest on judgment debts Judgment debts accrue simple interest at 8% per annum until paid, unless the court decides otherwise. By default, interest runs from the date judgment is given, unless the court, a rule or a Practice Direction provides differently. The court may order interest to run from a date before judgment. For further guidance, see Practice Note: Interest on judgment debts, together with the following Practice Notes: County Court judgments and orders—additional matters Which enforcement of judgment method should I choose?—in particular, the section: Which enforcement of judgment method should I choose?—In which court should you enforce your judgment—practical considerations Transferring a judgment from the High Court to a Country Court CPR 70.3 makes provision for transfer of proceedings in question, and states that an application must be made to the High Court before an order permitting the transfer of the proceedings will be granted by the court...

If a monetary order in family proceedings remains unpaid, the judgment creditor may, in those circumstances, seek a judgment summons by applying to the court for enforcement. The process is regulated by the Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010), SI 2010/2955, Pt 33, and if the court is persuaded that the debtor has defaulted on a debt and has, or has had since the order, the means to discharge the unpaid amount yet has refused or failed to do so, it may order the debtor’s committal to prison. This sanction applies where default relates to the ordered sum and endures despite the debtor’s means...