Powered by Lexis+®
Jurisdiction(s):
United Kingdom
CASE STUDY

“A lot of the work that I do is historic-the maximum sentences change at different points of time. It's really complicated and people get it wrong all the time. That's when having a timeline is really useful.”

1 High Pavement

Access all documents on Pre-action

Pre-action meaning

/ˈpriːˈakʃ(ə)n/
What does Pre-action mean?
Pre-action describes the stage before court proceedings are issued, when parties investigate the dispute, exchange information and attempt resolution. It is a descriptive expression rather than a statutory term, but in England and Wales it is structured by the Civil Procedure Rules via the Practice Direction – Pre-Action Conduct and Protocols and specific Pre-Action Protocols (for example, debt, clinical negligence, construction, professional negligence and media claims). Typical steps include a letter before claim/letter before action, an informed response, proportionate disclosure of key documents, obtaining early expert input where needed, considering ADR/mediation, and addressing limitation (often with a standstill agreement). The court may impose costs and case management sanctions for non-compliance. Usage is broadly consistent across the UK and Ireland, with jurisdictional differences: - Scotland: pre-action protocols (notably in personal injury) operate by agreement or practice; pre-litigation conduct can influence expenses. - Northern Ireland: sector-specific pre-action protocols and practice directions apply; non-compliance may affect costs and directions. - Ireland: there is no universal protocol regime, but pre-action steps and demand letters are standard; statutory schemes apply in some areas, notably the mandatory Personal Injuries Assessment Board (PIAB) process before most personal injury proceedings. The pre-action stage is central to early settlement, narrowing issues,...
Speed up all aspects of your legal work with tools that help you to work faster and smarter. Win cases, close deals and grow your business–all whilst saving time and reducing risk.

View the related Checklists about Pre-action

CHECKLISTS
Property transactions: planning due diligence on use—permissions, conditions, enforcement, immunity and reporting (England and Wales)

Section 57 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (TCPA 1990) requires planning consent for any material change in the use of buildings or land. Any limitations or conditions attached to a permission must likewise be adhered to. Liability for any existing breach will transfer to the purchaser. It is therefore essential to verify that the current use of the entire property is properly authorised and that all related conditions are being complied with, or to establish whether any unauthorised use or breach has become immune from enforcement. For further information, see Practice Note: Material change of use. Is the use authorised? Confirm the permitted use of the property, or, where relevant, each planning unit, and determine whether that use is authorised by: an explicit planning permission a certificate of lawful use, or permitted development rights If the permitted use does not mirror an express planning permission, do not assume it is unlawful; it may still be authorised by...

Read More Right Arrow
CHECKLISTS
Commercial landlords’ remedies against insolvent individual tenants—checklist covering forfeiture, CRAR, guarantors, subtenant notices and rent deposits under IVA, bankruptcy and DRO moratoria (England and Wales)

Options for landlord This checklist outlines the choices open to a landlord of commercial premises where the tenant is an insolvent individual, and explains the effect of restrictions operating under the various insolvency regimes. Where a landlord of a commercial property seeks to take steps against an insolvent tenant who is an individual, this checklist should then be referred to to confirm whether the landlord is permitted to pursue such action...

Read More Right Arrow
CHECKLISTS
Freezing injunctions in corporate and personal insolvency: step-by-step checklist for urgent applications, evidence, model orders, undertakings, WFOs, disclosure and enforcement (England and Wales)

Introduction to freezing injunctions and scope of this checklist A freezing injunction (also known as a freezing order) is a temporary court order that prevents a respondent from disposing of or transferring its assets out of the relevant jurisdiction—namely England and Wales—or, in the case of a worldwide freezing order (WFO), from moving them anywhere in the world. The court’s principal aim in granting such relief is to preserve the respondent’s assets so that, if the applicant later obtains judgment against the respondent, there will be assets available for recovery by the applicant and, if necessary, enforcement action. This Checklist explains how to make an application for a freezing injunction where claims are contemplated or already underway in a corporate or personal insolvency context. As the precise circumstances of each matter must be assessed, this Checklist does not claim to be exhaustive; rather, it provides an overview of the key considerations at each stage when seeking an order of this kind. The focus throughout is asset preservation pending determination...

Read More Right Arrow

View the related Flowcharts about Pre-action

FLOWCHARTS
Defects under JCT Standard Building and Design and Build Contracts 2024/2016: Pre-Practical Completion, Rectification and Post-Rectification Flowchart

This flowchart takes you through the stages of a CIETAC arbitration under the CIETAC Arbitration Rules 2024 Although each arbitration differs and the tribunal will tailor proceedings to specifics of the case, it remains vital to appreciate how an arbitration will 'usually' progress, together with the timescales likely to apply...

Read More Right Arrow
FLOWCHARTS
Building and operating websites: IP and brand, regulatory, contractual and dispute issues—lawyers’ flowchart

Stage 1—preparing to bring a claim and pre-action matters Guidance on infringement, defences, ownership, injunctions, running disputes, and the Business and Property Courts Disclosure Scheme; cease and desist precedent; timetable checklist; key forms; IP insurance. Stage 2—letter of claim alleging copyright infringement Guidance on infringement, drafting letters of claim, unjustified threats and remedies, with precedents for standard and peer‑to‑peer infringement letters. Stage 3—commencing proceedings Notes on infringement, secondary infringement, permitted acts, remedies, criminal offences, the Business and Property Courts and the Disclosure Scheme; pleadings/initial disclosure precedents; Disclosure/IPEC flow tools; CPR claim/defence/settlement/default forms. Stage 4—case management Guidance on running disputes, costs management and the Disclosure Scheme; checklist; Chancery, Patents Court and IPEC Guides; Mitchell v NGN; core case‑management and disclosure forms. Stage 5—disclosure and evidence Notes on e‑disclosure, witness statements and the Disclosure Scheme; PD 57AC for Business and Property Courts trial statements (not...

Read More Right Arrow
FLOWCHARTS
England and Wales UK trade mark infringement litigation toolkit: staged flowchart, practice notes, precedents, forms and checklists from pre-action through trial to post-trial

As of 12 January 2023, the EU’s Regulation on foreign subsidies distorting the internal market (FSR) took effect...

Read More Right Arrow

View the related News about Pre-action

NEWS
EU competition and State aid: pharmaceutical enforcement 2018–2022, MEO test guidance on risk finance, mergers update (26 January 2024)

Competition policy Commission publishes report on enforcement of EU antitrust and merger control rules in the pharmaceutical sector between 2018–2022 The Commission has issued a report on competition enforcement—covering antitrust and merger control—in the pharmaceutical sector, outlining the activities undertaken by the Commission and national competition authorities during 2018 to 2022. It updates an earlier 2019 report that examined the period from 2009 to 2017. Alongside a broad overview of enforcement in pharmaceuticals, the report describes the sector’s key features that guide competition assessments and, through concrete and practical examples, clearly demonstrates how competition law action protected undertakings and consumers, including in the course of the Covid-19 crisis...

Read More Right Arrow
NEWS
EU competition litigation update: Livronsa Euribor reference; General Court orders in Feralpi and Kingspan; State aid appeals on Swedish CCS auction and Madeira scheme; trackers and calendar (22 April 2025)

Antitrust The application in Case C-60/25 Livronsa has now been published, an Italian national reference asking whether national courts must regard the Euribor manipulation evidence confirmed by the Commission and the Court of Justice as conclusive, and whether the ensuing competition restriction applies only to the derivatives market or instead to all markets that use the manipulated Euribor benchmark—see also the application The General Court has recently issued an order in Case T-413/21 Feralpi v Commission, an action lodged against the Commission for failing to pay Default Interest as required by the General Court in Cases C-85/15 Feralpi v Commission...

Read More Right Arrow
NEWS
EU competition update 8 January 2025: STRABAG/Becker JV clearance, simplified merger notifications, and CJEU State aid hearing in Commission v Bulgaria

Mergers Following a phase I investigation, the Commission approved the formation of a joint venture between STRABAG AG and Becker Umweltdienste GmbH (M.11790)—see further, Midday Express. The Commission received notifications for: General Atlantic/PSG/Hostaway (M.11864) (simplified merger procedure) Eichler Consulting/Maximilian Aicher/Evelyne Maria Aicher/Wolfgang Reitzle/Telchar Investments/RMH Production (M.11842) (simplified merger procedure) Ares/GCP (M.11787) (simplified merger procedure) Note—For ongoing merger investigations before the Commission, see the EU mergers—ongoing cases tracker. State aid The Court of Justice held a hearing in Case C‑632/23 Commission v Bulgaria (Échanges de terrains forestiers II), an action brought by the Commission against Bulgaria for failing to comply with Decision SA.26212 concerning aid granted to private forest owners—see further, application. Note—For all live State aid appeals before the Court of Justice, see the Court of Justice State aid appeals—ongoing cases tracker. Upcoming dates For dates of forthcoming EU competition developments, see...

Read More Right Arrow

View the related Practice Notes about Pre-action

PRACTICE NOTES
Court of Justice of the European Union State aid appeals—live tracker of appeals from the General Court and recovery actions

This tracker monitors current Court of Justice appeals concerning State aid (Articles 107–109 TFEU) and other aid recovery actions. For concluded matters, consult Court of Justice State aid appeals—closed cases tracker. Note—closed appeals are transferred from this page to the closed trackers within seven days of the final ruling. For the Commission’s recent State aid decisions, see EU State aid decisions—ongoing cases tracker; for appeals pending before the General Court, see General Court State aid appeals—ongoing cases tracker; and for national references before the Court of Justice touching on State aid, see Court of Justice State aid national references—ongoing cases tracker. Appeals from the General Court Case C-306/26 P, LM v Commission — Appeal against the General Court’s order in Case T-261/25 declaring inadmissible an annulment action concerning parts of Commission decision SA.44944—Tax treatment of public casinos in Germany and SA.53552—Alleged guarantee for public casinos in Germany (Wirtschaftlichkeitsgarantie). Latest development: Lodged—07/04/2026. Case C-505/24 P, Condor Flugdienst v Ryanair —...

Read More Right Arrow
PRACTICE NOTES
Economic torts compared in England and Wales: conspiracy (lawful/unlawful), unlawful interference and procuring breach—elements, intention, remedies, defences, limitation, pleading and interim relief

This Practice Note on economic torts This note summarises, at a high level, the key differences when pursuing claims for lawful means conspiracy, unlawful means conspiracy, the tort of unlawful interference, and procuring a breach of contract. Practice Notes: Civil conspiracy claims (economic tort) Lawful means conspiracy (civil action) Unlawful means conspiracy (civil action) Economic tort of unlawful interference The tort of procuring a breach of contract Closely connected to procuring a breach of contract is the so‑called ‘Marex tort’, a cause of action founded on an alleged deliberate infringement by the defendant of the claimant’s rights in a judgment debt; see Practice Note: The Marex tort (interference with a judgment debt). These claims may (though need not) involve a fiduciary or agent, including company directors. For further guidance, see: Claims against directors—key considerations for dispute resolution practitioners Agency disputes Fiduciary Duties Fiduciary duties—remedies for breach Such causes...

Read More Right Arrow
PRACTICE NOTES
Family arbitration and court oversight in England and Wales: stays, consent orders, and challenges post-Haley for financial remedies and children under the IFLA scheme and Arbitration Acts 1996/2025

This Practice Note clearly explains the courts’ function within the context of family arbitration. In matters concerning families, any arbitration normally proceeds under the Institute of Family Law Arbitrators (IFLA) scheme. The courts continue to have overall jurisdiction over any family arbitration award or determination and will endorse the award or determination provided it falls within recognised limits, thereby fully respecting the parties’ autonomy. For further practical guidance on, among other things, the conduct of arbitration in family cases, the principal advantages of arbitration, the scope of the IFLA scheme and the arbitrator’s powers, please see Practice Note: Family arbitration—introduction. Acting on Law Commission proposals to reform the Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996) and to bring in measures to bolster arbitrator immunity, enhance overall case efficiency and clarify the court’s powers, a draft Bill reflecting those recommendations was formally laid before Parliament and subsequently obtained Royal Assent on 25 February 2025. Accordingly, the Arbitration Act 2025 (AA 2025) modifies AA 1996 from 1 August 2025 by virtue of the Arbitration...

Read More Right Arrow

View the related Precedents about Pre-action

PRECEDENTS
Annual board report template: competition law compliance systems, controls, risk assessment, reporting, training and recommendations

1 General information Report date: [ Enter date ] Previous report date: [ Enter date ] Report submitted by: [ Enter name ] 2 Action points arising from last report Action item: [ Enter action point ], Responsible person: [ Identify person responsible for this action point ], Status: [ Enter status ] Action item: [ Enter action point ], Responsible person: [ Identify person responsible for this action point ], Status: [ Enter status ] Action item: [ Enter action point ], Responsible person: [ Identify person responsible for this action point ], Status: [ Enter status ] Action item: [ Enter action point ], Responsible person: [ Identify person responsible for this action point ], Status: [ Enter status ] 3 Executive summary This report covers the following items: 3.1 overview of business operations; 3.2 account of the operation of competition law compliance systems and controls;...

Read More Right Arrow
PRECEDENTS
Brief details of claim template—section 423 Insolvency Act 1986 transactions defrauding creditors: declarations, restoration directions and costs (England and Wales and Scotland)

Brief details of claim This action is brought under section 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986. The Claimant is the [ insert office held ] at [ insert name of the company ] (the Company). ...

Read More Right Arrow
PRECEDENTS
Precedent Excel Template: ICT Development Risk Assessment and Risk Management Plan

Precedent ICT (information and communication technology) risk assessment and risk management plan This Precedent ICT (information and communication technology) risk assessment and risk management plan lets you record risks linked to any proposed ICT development and explain how those risks will be handled. It is pre-populated with examples, which you can easily delete if needed...

Read More Right Arrow

View the related Q&As about Pre-action

Q&As
EAT appeal: Can respondent withdraw 2 weeks pre‑hearing after filing Answer, without sanction?

Response to appeal Under the Employment Appeal Rules 1993 (EAT Rules), SI 1993/2854, rule 6(2) provides that a respondent who intends to oppose an appeal must lodge with the Appeal Tribunal a written answer in accordance with, or broadly following, Form 3 contained in the Schedule to these Rules, setting out the grounds on which they rely. Nevertheless, where the respondent seeks to rely on any ground that mirrors a ground adopted by the employment tribunal when making the judgment, decision, declaration or order under appeal, it is sufficient simply to say so in the answer, and it shall be sufficient to state that fact in response. For further details, see Practice Note: Responding to an appeal...

Read More Right Arrow
Q&As
Section 38 agreement: termination and bond release pre-commencement

Section 38 agreements These agreements fall under section 38 of the Highways Act 1980; refer to Practice Note: Highways—adoption agreements. There is no statutory route by which agreements can be ended or ‘cancelled’. However, a section 38 agreement may, in principle, be altered by a deed of variation, but this requires consent of all parties to the original agreement...

Read More Right Arrow
Q&As
PCR 2015: Best practice for contracting authorities on making procurement documents available electronically

A well-known problem amongst procurement professionals A widely recognised headache for procurement practitioners arises from the duty in regulation 53 of the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (PCR 2015), SI 2015/102 (PCR 2015, SI 2015/102, reg 53). It requires the ‘procurement documents’ to be accessible at the time a public contract is advertised in the Official Journal of the European Union (the Official Journal, or OJEU). In essence, contracting authorities must use the internet to provide unrestricted, complete and immediate access, at no cost, to those documents from the day a notice, issued under regulation 51, appears in the Official Journal, or from the day an invitation to confirm interest is dispatched. The issue most often raised, particularly for public procurements run under the restricted procedure (and comparable routes that involve a pre-qualification phase ahead of the award stage), is whether the invitation to tender and the specification must already be available when the contract notice is published in the OJEU. Timing this disclosure often proves challenging for contracting authorities...

Read More Right Arrow