Featured documents
This Practice Note outlines the law concerning criminal recklessness. The subjective test for recklessness Certain statutory and common law offences allow the prosecution to prove mens rea through ‘recklessness’. Put simply, recklessness is where the accused takes an unjustified risk that results in unlawful harm or damage. The House of Lords in R v G reaffirmed the subjective approach to recklessness. Before R v G, two distinct tests were used, depending on the offence charged: Subjective recklessness from R v Cunningham: the prosecution had to establish that the accused personally foresaw the risk. Objective recklessness from R v Caldwell: the prosecution only needed to show that the risk would have been obvious to a reasonable person, without proving the accused themselves foresaw it. In R v G, the House of Lords concluded that the objective test could operate unfairly where a defendant did not foresee the
This Practice Note examines the remedy of rescission, explaining when and in what manner a contract can be unwound (at common law, in equity and under statute) and thereby terminated and brought to an end. It covers the consequences and effects of rescission, the principal grounds for setting aside an agreement (misrepresentation, mistake, undue influence, duress, non‑disclosure, fiduciary misdealing and bribery) and the main obstacles to claiming rescission—affirmation, the intervention of third‑party rights and the impossibility of restitution. For further guidance on rescission in the context of misrepresentation, see Practice Note: Misrepresentation—rescission as a remedy. There are many ways in which a contract may reach its end; see: Terminating contracts—how and when a contract ends—overview for a brief and accessible summary, with links to the related further practical guidance, including Practice Note: Termination and expiry of contracts. For a table
What is a res judicata? A res judicata is a determination by a court or tribunal with jurisdiction over the cause of action and the parties, which finally disposes of the issues decided so they cannot be litigated again by those bound, save on appeal. Final judgments entered by default or by consent fall within this concept, whereas rulings on purely procedural points and any decision lacking finality do not. The doctrine’s aim is to bring litigation to an end and shield parties from being harassed by the same dispute twice. in personam—binds the parties and their privies in rem—binds all persons, privy or otherwise (ie a judgment binding the whole world) A party may rely on res judicata: as an estoppel to defeat an opponent’s claim or defence; and/or as the basis of their own claim or
The offence of causing grievous bodily harm with intent Wounding or causing grievous bodily harm (GBH) with intent can be tried solely in the Crown Court on indictment. Elements of the offence Under the Offences against the Person Act 1861 (OATPA 1861), the prosecution must establish that the defendant unlawfully and maliciously: wounded with the intention of causing GBH, or caused GBH with that intention, or wounded intending to resist or prevent the lawful arrest or detention of any person, or caused GBH intending to resist or prevent the lawful arrest or detention of any person ‘Unlawfully’ and ‘maliciously’ Unlawfully The wounding or causing of GBH must be unlawful. Such conduct may be lawful if used: in self-defence in defence of another in defence of property for the prevention of crime where the victim gave express or implied consent For further information on these defences, see below:
Most recent Practice notes
ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is no longer updated and is supplied solely for background reference purposes only. In addition, certain links may not lead to the provisions as they stood on the date the guidance in this Practice Note was issued. Warning: if you plan to print the final report, it runs to more than 500 pages in length. Introduction On 14 January 2010, Jackson LJ released his final report on the review of costs in civil litigation. The report examines how cases are financed and how costs are generated, managed and evaluated throughout. Jackson LJ proposes fundamental reforms, firmer enforcement of existing rules, and greater awareness among judges, lawyers and litigants alike. Funding Before proceedings begin, there must be clarity and understanding about how they will be funded. A review of the legal aid system was beyond the scope and remit of the report....
The lawyer’s role in organising a mediation Where the parties conclude that mediation is a suitable route to settle their disagreement, or they are bound by a contract requiring them to consider mediation if a dispute arises, or the court directs the parties to consider mediation, responsibility for arranging the mediation at the outset of the process rests with the parties’ legal representatives in practice. This Practice Note looks at the lawyer’s role in setting up a mediation, including selecting a mediator, arranging the venue, drafting the mediation agreement and determining who will attend, and settling other practicalities as required. For information about the parties’ duties to consider alternative dispute resolution ( ADR) and the courts’ powers to order or encourage ADR, both before and during litigation, see Practice Note: Court powers to order or encourage ADR in civil...
This Practice Note highlights the main considerations to bear in mind where the other side in civil proceedings is a litigant in person ( LIP), rather than being legally represented. It sets out who falls within that definition and points the LIP to helpful sources that may support the efficient progress of the case and the smooth administration of the proceedings where reasonably appropriate. For further guidance relating to litigants in person, see: Parties and their representatives—overview. What is a litigant in person? A litigant in person is an individual who conducts legal proceedings on their own behalf, without the benefit of professional representation. In March 2013, the then Master of the Rolls, Lord Dyson, issued Practice Guidance entitled ' Terminology for Litigants in Person' to clarify the correct terminology to be used when referring to individuals who conduct legal proceedings on their own behalf. That...
This Practice Note offers guidance on reading and applying the relevant CPR provisions. Depending on the court handling your case, you may need to consider further requirements—see below. It describes how to seek an interim injunction and outlines the core procedural steps that apply to all applications made on notice, that is, where the respondent is warned in advance of the hearing. For how this basic route is adapted for without notice applications or for particular categories of interim orders, see the following Practice Notes: Interim injunctions—without notice applications Freezing injunctions—the application Proprietary freezing injunctions Search and imaging orders—making the application Be aware that special issues arise where relief is sought against persons unknown—see Practice Note: Injunctions against persons unknown. For broader help on applications, see Practice Note: How to make an application for a court order ( CPR 23). 6 April 2025...
From 1 January 2026, the Commercial Court and the London Commercial Court are running a pilot under CPR PD 51ZH, under which materials used at public hearings (including witness statements and skeleton arguments and similar hearing materials) will, by default, be available to members of the public. Practitioners issuing applications in these courts should promptly acquaint themselves with the pilot and ensure that suitable measures are taken to safeguard their clients when drafting affected documents and materials prepared for hearings. For further guidance, see Practice Note: Non-party access to court documents and information in civil proceedings. Applications in the Commercial Courts If your case proceeds in the Commercial Court, the provisions of the Commercial Court Guide govern any application you bring. If you are in one of the Circuit Commercial Courts, the Commercial Court Guide applies as adapted by the Circuit Commercial Court Guide (...
ARCHIVED : This Practice Note is archived and is for historical purposes only. On 1 April 2013, wide-ranging changes to litigation funding took effect; but how has this played out in day-to-day terms? The reforms introduced a redistribution of risk among several actors, including solicitors’ practices, clients, third-party funders and insurers. Central to the regime is the manner in which these participants collaborate to equip parties with the means to finance proceedings they intend to pursue. In this Practice Note, we review each available funding route and assess the consequences of the reforms, particularly given their arrival coincided with reductions to legal aid; that contemporaneous curtailment of legal aid was not anticipated by Lord Jackson when compiling his Final Costs Report. We also outline how stakeholders share exposure under the framework. This Practice Note evaluates the ramifications of the funding overhaul from a range of...
ARCHIVED : This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. This Practice Note applies to mediations where the transitional criteria in Article 69 of the Withdrawal Agreement between the UK and the EU were satisfied on or before IP completion day (ie 31 December 2020, 11 pm), so the mediation falls within the Mediation Directive 2008/52/ EC. For further guidance on those transitional requirements, see Practice Note: Brexit post implementation period—considerations for dispute resolution practitioners [ Archived]— Mediation. Where those conditions are met, UK domestic legislation preserves the continued application of selected parts of the civil procedure rules that were otherwise revoked or amended as at 31 December 2020, 11 pm, including old Part 78 referred to throughout this Practice Note. For additional guidance, see Practice Note: Brexit post implementation period— CPR changes [ Archived]. Copies of the previous provisions are available here: This Practice Note...
This Practice Note explores what is required for a legally binding offer. It covers: the meaning of ‘offer’ how to distinguish an offer from an invitation to treat, with common examples types of offer, ie proposals ‘subject to contract’, heads of terms, and unilateral contracts the ways in which offers can be terminated For practical guidance on valid acceptance, see Practice Note: Forming contracts—acceptance. For the court’s general approach to contract formation, see Practice Note: Forming enforceable contracts—the court's general approach. Note: Part 36 settlement offers made under CPR 36 fall outside the usual rules of contract law and are governed by the specific regime set out in CPR 36. For guidance on what constitutes a valid Part 36 offer, see Practice Note: Part 36 offers—how to make a valid Part 36 offer. The elements of a legally binding offer the...
ARCHIVED: This archived Practice Note is no longer maintained and is provided for background only. In addition, certain links may not take you to the provisions as they stood on the date of publication. For information on earlier or later changes to the CPR, see: CPR updates—overview and Procedure Rule Committee minutes—overview. The source for this Practice Note is SI 2012/2208 ( L8), which sets out the Civil Procedure ( Amendment No 2) Rules 2012, placed before parliament on 29 August and commenced on 1 October 2012, together with the 59th Update—practice directions amendment... Changes to case management ( Part 26) New provisions are inserted after CPR 26.3(7) describing the directions a court may issue where a party fails to lodge an allocation questionnaire, and the resulting costs consequences for the party in default. They also state what is to occur where the...
What is a warrant of delivery? When a claimant succeeds in a claim to recover goods, the County Court can make an order requiring the defendant to hand those items back to the claimant. If the defendant does not comply, a warrant of delivery is the mechanism used to enforce that order. It is a County Court document instructing bailiffs to ensure the goods are delivered by the defendant. When can I apply for a warrant of delivery? In order to apply for a warrant of delivery there are a number of requirements: Requirement Guidance A judgment or order requiring the delivery of goods, with or without the alternative of paying the assessed value of those goods. Where you have a judgment or order for the delivery of any goods, it will be enforceable by a warrant of delivery in accordance with CPR 83.23, unless any other rule or act...
Norwich Pharmacal Orders ( NPOs) This Practice Note sets out what Norwich Pharmacal Orders are, explaining their nature and when they may properly be used in practice. In particular, it details the prerequisites that must be satisfied: a wrong has been committed, or is arguably committed, by an ultimate wrongdoer the applicant has a genuine intention to seek redress for those arguable wrongs the person targeted by the order is mixed up in the wrongdoing and is not a mere witness an NPO is a necessary and proportionate step in all the circumstances it is fitting for the court to exercise its discretion The Note also considers the consequences of non-compliance, the use of information obtained under an NPO in other proceedings, and the availability of Norwich Pharmacal relief in relation to disclosure required for foreign proceedings. It additionally addresses applications to discharge or set aside an NPO. For...
This Practice Note outlines the purpose and advantages of seeking a Norwich Pharmacal order, obtained so that an applicant can pursue a claim against an alleged wrongdoer whose identity was not known to it before making the application for the order. In view of the costs likely to arise from applying, including the work involved in assembling evidence, the guidance addresses the questions a prospective applicant ought to be satisfied about before deciding whether to apply. What is a Norwich Pharmacal order? Described by one judge as an exceptional jurisdiction with a narrow ambit, a ‘ Norwich Pharmacal order’ takes its name from Norwich Pharmacal Co v Customs and Excise Commissioners. In that case, the House of Lords, allowing an appeal from a Court of Appeal bench that included Lord Denning, upheld a judge’s order compelling the respondent to the...
This Practice Note examines the jurisdictional service gateway, or ground permitting service, contained in CPR PD 6B, para 3.1(18), which concerns applications for costs orders in favour of or against individuals who are not parties to the proceedings (often referred to as third party cost orders). The Note outlines gateway 18 and offers commentary on the approach the courts have taken when construing it. It should be read alongside Practice Note: Cross border service—jurisdictional gateways (principles). For guidance on non-party costs orders generally, see Practice Notes: Non-party costs orders—guidelines and Non-party costs orders—application. Gateway 18 Gateway 18 ( CPR PD 6B, para 3.1(18)) addresses a claim by a party seeking an order that the court exercise its power under section 51 of the Senior Courts Act 1981 to make, as appropriate, a costs order in favour of or against a person who is not a party to...
This Practice Note considers whether a non-party costs order ( NPCO) will be made against a funder of litigation. It reviews how the courts approach NPCOs against litigation funders, distinguishing between pure funders and professional funders, and highlights concerns where orders surpass the amounts contributed and/or where costs are awarded on an indemnity, rather than standard, basis. The Arkin cap is analysed together with Excalibur Ventures v Texas Keystone (2016), which confirmed that the cap can cover sums provided specifically to satisfy security for costs requirements. It also considers Davey v Money (2019), where the High Court regarded the Arkin approach as a means to secure a just outcome in the particular circumstances, not a rigid rule, and imposed an NPCO exceeding the funding advanced under the agreement. Non-party costs orders—application Non-party costs...
ARCHIVED : This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. This Practice Note is archived and no longer maintained. It addresses the scenario in which the UK and the EU do not conclude an agreement on jurisdiction following the UK’s exit from the EU. Across the implementation period starting on exit day (ie the date the UK leaves the EU), the provisions of the withdrawal agreement will apply. For guidance on the implementation period and the effect of the withdrawal agreement on jurisdiction, see Practice Note: Brexit implementation period—jurisdiction [ Archived]. The Note assesses the impact of the UK departing the EU on exit day without a deal on jurisdictional issues in UK court proceedings that involve EU Member States. Exit day has the meaning assigned by section 20 of the European Union ( Withdrawal) Act 2018, as amended......
ARCHIVED : This Practice Note addresses the scenario where the UK and the EU fail to reach any accord on settlement procedures after the UK’s departure from the EU. Throughout the implementation period commencing on exit day—the date the UK leaves the EU—the provisions of the withdrawal agreement will apply. For guidance on the implementation period and the effect of the withdrawal agreement on taking of evidence, see Practice Note: Brexit implementation period—settlement [ Archived]. This Practice Note examines the implications of the UK leaving the EU without a deal for the mediation of disputes in civil and commercial matters. There are two principal UK instruments relating to a no deal Brexit and mediation. The first is The Cross– Border Mediation ( EU Directive) ( EU Exit) Regulations 2019, SI 2019/469, which sets out the revocation and saving of the Cross Border Mediation ( EU...
ARCHIVED : This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. This Practice Note, prepared in collaboration with Guy Pendell, Liz Williams and Kushal Gandhi of CMS, addresses the scenario in which the UK and the EU do not secure an agreement on jurisdiction after the UK’s departure from the EU. Throughout the implementation period beginning on exit day—the day the UK leaves the EU—the provisions of the withdrawal agreement will apply. For guidance on that period and the withdrawal agreement’s effect on jurisdiction, see Practice Note: Brexit implementation period—jurisdiction [ Archived]. This Note considers the implications of the UK leaving the EU on exit day without a deal for jurisdictional issues in UK court proceedings that involve the European Free Trade Association ( EFTA) States that are parties to the Lugano Convention 2007, namely Iceland, Norway and...
ARCHIVED : This Practice Note addresses the position that arises where the UK and the EU fail to reach arrangements for the cross-border enforcement of judgments after the UK’s departure from the EU. During the implementation period that commences on exit day—that is, the day the UK leaves the EU—the provisions of the withdrawal agreement will apply throughout that period for enforcement. For guidance on the implementation period and the effect of the withdrawal agreement on enforcement, see Practice Note: Brexit implementation period—enforcement [ Archived]. This archived note examines, in particular, the implications of a no-deal exit for the enforcement of judgments arising from civil and commercial claims under the following instruments, namely: Brussels Convention, Regulation ( EC) 44/2001 ( Brussels I), Regulation ( EU) 1215/2012 ( Brussels I (recast)), Lugano Convention 2007 and EC- Denmark...
ARCHIVED: This Practice Note addresses the scenario in which the UK and the EU fail to secure arrangements for the service of documents after the UK’s departure from the EU. Throughout the implementation period commencing on exit day, ie the date the UK leaves the EU, the terms of the withdrawal agreement apply. For direction on that period and how the withdrawal agreement affects service, see Practice Note: Brexit implementation period—service of documents [ Archived]. The Note also examines the position if the UK exits the EU without a deal in relation to serving court documents. The following UK instruments made for a no deal Brexit affect service: The Service of Documents and Taking of Evidence in Civil and Commercial Matters ( Revocation and Saving Provisions) ( EU Exit) Regulations 2018, SI 2018/1257, which repeals the principal EU measure in this field, ie...
Practice Note: Summary judgment—general principles As set out in Practice Note: Summary judgment—general principles, the essential question on a summary judgment bid is simply whether the respondent lacks any real prospect of succeeding on the claim, defence, or a specific issue in dispute. The bar for establishing a ‘real’ chance of success is very low; accordingly, it is helpful to examine examples where the courts have held that a respondent’s case was so weak it had no ‘real’ prospect of success at trial, by way of illustration. This Practice Note concentrates on decisions from 2026 onwards. Case details Date of judgment Outline of facts Why did the respondent lack ‘real’ prospects of success? Instagroup Ltd v Northwest Insulations Ltd ( In Liquidation) Chancery Division [2026] EWHC 819 ( Ch) 14 April 2026 The claimant provided insulation products and outsourced fitting services, a...
Popular documents
When evaluating a general damages claim, the practitioner ought initially to refer to the Judicial College Guidelines (JCG)...
This Practice Note This Practice Note reviews mechanisms used in settling litigation. A Tomlin order consists of a consent order paired with a schedule. It operates to stay proceedings on terms that have been agreed. The provisions contained in the schedule may remain confidential. This Practice Note describes the scope of confidentiality attaching to the schedule and sets out how it differs from a standard consent order. Sample wording for a Tomlin order is included, alongside links to precedents, as well as guidance on court approval. It also addresses varying, setting aside and enforcing a Tomlin order, including the considerations the court will take into account when handling applications for each. Further guidance is provided on interpreting and applying the relevant provisions of the CPR; however, some courts and divisions impose very specific requirements for both drafting and approval, and for approaching the schedule and confidentiality issues. Accordingly, you must consider the particular rules and court guide provisions in the forum where your claim is proceeding when drawing up the Tomlin order...
Date [ date ] Parties [ name of Landlord ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Landlord) [ name of Tenant ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Tenant) [ [ name of Guarantor ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Guarantor) ] [ [ name of Mortgagee ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Mortgagee) ] Definitions Within this Deed, the terms below shall be interpreted as follows: [ Annual Rent • the annual sum reserved under the Lease; ] [ Insurance Rent • the Tenant’s share of the Landlord’s costs of insuring the Property (as set out in the Lease); ] Lease • the lease of the Property dated [ date ], entered into between (1) [ the Landlord OR [ name ...
I, [ name ], of [ address ], solemnly and sincerely state that: [ Matters to be verified, set out in numbered paragraphs ] I make this solemn statement in good conscience, believing it to be true, and pursuant to the provisions of the Statutory Declarations Act 1835. DECLARED at [ details ] this [ day ] day of [ month and year ] Before me ................................................................................ [ signature of the person before whom the declaration is made ] A [ commissioner for oaths OR [ solicitor OR [ insert other qualification ] ] authorised to administer oaths ]...
Discover more from LexisNexis
