Legal Practice Notes

This Practice Note reviews the hearing of contempt proceedings under CPR 81 (also known as ‘committal proceedings’), covering whether the court will sit in public or in private, the directions the court will give in advance of the hearing, the timing of the hearing, and the evidence to be placed before the court at the hearing. It also considers what happens if the defendant is absent from the hearing, the defendant’s right to silence, and the defendant’s entitlement to legal aid, legal representation and/or an interpreter. Hearing to be in public The English judicial system proceeds from the fundamental principle of open justice, subject, on occasion, to permitted derogations. CPR 81.8(1) provides that: ‘all hearings of contempt proceedings shall, irrespective of the parties’ consent, be listed and heard in public unless the court otherwise directs.’ This mirrors the provisions set out in CPR 39.2, which states that the...

This Practice Note addresses the undertakings needed to secure a freezing injunction. In particular, it highlights the cross‑undertaking in damages, often called the ‘price’ of securing a freezing injunction, and explores in detail fortification of that cross‑undertaking, explaining what fortification is and when it is needed, who can give fortification, recognised forms of fortification, and whether discharge from fortification is possible. This Practice Note offers guidance on construing and applying the relevant CPR provisions. Depending on the court where your claim is progressing, you may need to consider additional provisions—see further Court specific guidance below. It explains who may provide fortification and the forms the court will accept, and addresses the possibility of being released from any fortification given where appropriate only. What is fortification and when is it required? For the court to grant an interim injunction, the applicant must give certain...

Practice Note on frustration This Practice Note offers a practical steer on assessing whether an unforeseen occurrence has frustrated a contract. It should be read alongside Practice Note: Discharge by frustration. Frustration is a common law doctrine in English law. It brings an agreement to an immediate close where an unexpected supervening event frustrates the bargain, making performance impossible, unlawful or so fundamentally different from what was originally agreed. Where frustration bites, all future duties under the contract are extinguished. Money paid before the supervening event and discharge can be reclaimed, while sums not yet due cease to be payable, subject to the court’s discretion under the Law Reform ( Frustrated Contracts) Act 1943 ( LR( FC) A 1943) to permit recovery of expenses previously incurred. Establishing frustration is notoriously difficult. The doctrine injects uncertainty into contractual dealings, a result the courts regard...

This Tracker compiles examples of costs rulings where the court has either imposed an issues‑based costs order or declined to do so. Such an order is unusual. When one is made, it is essential that the terms can be measured with clarity, because solicitors face real challenges when identifying the costs that relate to each individual issue, and clear parameters help the assessment process and any detailed apportionment required. Court makes an issues-based costs order—examples The following decisions illustrate occasions on which an issues‑based costs order was made. The most recent judgment appears first, providing a current example of the approach. Judgment, citation and news analysis: Montres Breguet SA v Samsung Electronics Co Ltd [2022] EWHC 1895 ( Ch) — Consideration: The judge cited Pigot v Environment Agency [2020] EWHC 1444 ( Ch), emphasising that an issues‑based costs order is not warranted simply because a party did not...

ARCHIVED : This archived Practice Note summarises a number of key and/or illustrative cases relevant to freezing injunction applications, with particular focus on the period 1 January 2020 to 31 December 2024. It is not maintained and is for background information only. For illustrative decisions from 1 January 2025 onwards, see Practice Note: Freezing injunctions—illustrative decisions (2025). For general guidance and links to detailed content concerning freezing injunctions, see: Freezing injunctions—overview. Case details and analysis Court of Appeal Isabel dos Santos v Unitel S. A. [2024] EWCA Civ 1109 News Analysis: Good arguable case—no longer arguable in freezing order cases? ( Isabel dos Santos v Unitel) Judgment date: 30 September 2024 The Court of Appeal’s ruling in these proceedings addressed two central points relevant to applications for freezing injunctions. First, the Court of Appeal appeared to close the...

This Practice Note reviews the position under the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982 ( CJJA 1982) where enforcement of a foreign judgment is pursued in the courts of England and Wales, and an issue arises as to whether the judgment debtor submitted to the foreign court’s jurisdiction in the circumstances presented. The pertinent provisions of CJJA 1982, s 33 are outlined, addressing situations in which steps taken by the debtor in the overseas proceedings will not be treated as a submission to that court’s authority, and clarifying the scope of any such non-submission. Further guidance is offered on the grounds upon which a defendant might nevertheless be held to have accepted the foreign court’s jurisdiction, including: voluntary submission, submission by advancing a counterclaim, submission through an appeal on the merits of the foreign judgment, or submission by...

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is archived and no longer maintained This Practice Note outlines the continuing effects in Scotland of the Coronavirus ( COVID–19) pandemic across the following practice areas: Corporate Crime Dispute Resolution Private client Property Restructuring & Insolvency Key legislation applicable in Scotland The Coronavirus ( Scotland) Act 2020 and the Coronavirus ( Scotland) ( No 2) Act 2020 (together, the Scottish Coronavirus Acts) introduced time‑limited provisions to manage the pandemic. The Coronavirus ( Extension and Expiry) ( Scotland) Act 2021 brought to an end provisions no longer needed and prolonged those still required until the end of March 2022. The Coronavirus ( Scotland) Acts ( Amendment of Expiry Dates) Regulations 2022, SSI 2022/113, then revised the Scottish Coronavirus Acts so that Part 1 of each Act expired at the close of 30 September 2022. In parallel, the UK...

This Practice Note sets out guidance on interpreting and applying the relevant CPR provisions in practice. Depending on the court in which your case proceeds, you should also be alert to additional requirements—see the court-specific guidance below for further detail. It identifies when an interim injunction may cease (by expiry or discharge) or be altered, and considers the scope to modify undertakings, where appropriate. It also briefly touches on appeals arising in the interim injunction context. For general materials on injunctions, see: Interim and final injunctions—overview, together with the following supporting materials: Practice Note: Interim injunctions—the American Cyanamid guidelines Practice Note: Injunctions—key and illustrative decisions ( September 2019–2024) [ Archived] Opposing an on notice interim injunction application—checklist Opposing a without notice interim injunction application—checklist 6 April 2025 changes The CPR provisions concerning interim injunctive relief were updated with effect from 6 April 2025. In...

ARCHIVED : One persistent challenge for dispute resolution practitioners is staying current with case law developments that influence their speciality, or that bear on civil litigation procedure more broadly. This Practice Note distils the principal appeal authorities—namely rulings of the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court and, where pertinent, selected judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union ( CJEU)—that we have covered, giving users straightforward access to those rulings; see: Key civil litigation appeals in review—2020. You can navigate this material via the table of contents in the left margin, or search this tracker with [ CTRL]+[ F]. The Practice Note also flags a number of anticipated appeals, where identified, to support horizon scanning. It is not designed to be a comprehensive catalogue of every appeal and/or significant decision of interest to dispute resolution...

This Practice Note examines the expression ‘deemed service’. The term appears in CPR 6.14, and this Practice Note explains its meaning and function when read alongside the period of validity for a claim form under CPR 7.6 as set out there. Be aware that the deemed date may not correspond or align with the real date on which the defendant actually receives the claim form in practice. For users of Money Claims online, CPR 6.14 does not apply at all. For further details, see: Deemed date of service for Money claims online below. Also note that the deemed service rules for a claim form in CPR 6.14 are distinct from the deemed service rules for other documents; those are contained in CPR 6.26. For help, see the Practice Notes: Serving the defence— Deemed service ( CPR 6.26) and Serving documents...

This Practice Note This Practice Note explores the law of limitation in Scotland. For guidance on: the law of prescription in Scotland, consult Practice Notes: Prescription in Scotland and Short negative prescription in Scotland—the prescriptive period for obligations to pay damages other central areas of Scots law and procedure, refer to our Scotland collection the nearest equivalent in England and Wales, see Limitation: general—overview, which outlines the topic and links to more detailed guidance on various aspects of limitation in England and Wales Key AEVA 2018— Automated and Electric Vehicles Act 2018 LR( MP)( S) A 1980— Law Reform ( Miscellaneous Provisions) ( Scotland) Act 1980 PL( S) A 1973— Prescription and Limitation ( Scotland) Act 1973 P( S) A 2018— Prescription ( Scotland) Act 2018 Difference between limitation and prescription in Scots law PL( S) A 1973, often called the ‘1973...

CPR 52.6(2)(b) superseded rule 52.3(7)(b), and CPR 52.18 replaced rule 52.9, in October 2016. The wording was unchanged, so authorities decided before October 2016 in this field remain binding. For broader guidance on applications for permission to appeal, see the following Practice Notes: Permission to appeal—preliminary considerations Permission to appeal—the application Permission to appeal—hearing and next steps For targeted guidance on limited permission to appeal, see Practice Note: Permission to appeal—hearing and next steps— Limited permission to appeal in the Court of Appeal. Conditions on an appeal—introduction There are two principal provisions regulating conditions on an appeal: CPR 52.6(2)(b) allows the court, when granting permission on a first appeal, to impose terms—that is, to give permission subject to conditions CPR 52.18(1)(c) permits the appeal court, when considering setting aside permission or striking out an appeal notice, to impose new...

Sections 242 and 243 of the Insolvency Act 1986 ( IA 1986) In Scotland, these provisions regulate the two principal forms of antecedent transaction that a company may undertake. They do not apply to individuals or to companies registered in England and Wales; for the position in England, refer to the Practice Notes on transactions at an undervalue under section 238 and on preferences under section 239 of the Insolvency Act 1986. For Scottish individual/personal debtors, consult the Practice Note on gratuitous alienations by individual debtors. For a glossary of frequently used Scottish insolvency terminology, see Practice Note: Glossary of Scottish insolvency words and expressions. Unfair preferences What constitutes an unfair preference? An unfair preference is any transaction entered into by a company, whether before or after 1 April 1986, that has the effect of giving one creditor priority over the general body of creditors ( IA 1986, s...

This Practice Note examines how pivotal expert testimony and credibility are at trial, and therefore the weight the court may ascribe to expert material. It reviews why a court might prefer one expert’s opinion to another’s, when the court will choose between expert evidence and its own evaluation, what follows if an expert is neither called nor cross-examined, including the weight of unchallenged evidence, and offers practical guidance for giving expert evidence. Expert witnesses, and those instructing them, should have regard to: relevant CPR rules and Practice Directions the Guidance for the instruction of experts in civil claims (the Guidance). On 1 December 2014, the Guidance replaced the ‘ Protocol for the Instruction of Experts to give Evidence in Civil Claims’ formerly annexed to CPR PD 35 Practice Direction Pre- Action Conduct and Protocols, para 7 court-specific guidance found in court...

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is archived, not maintained, and offered for background reference only. In addition, certain links may no longer point to the provisions as they stood when the guidance in this Practice Note was issued. For details of earlier and/or later amendments to the CPR, see: CPR updates—overview and Procedure Rule Committee minutes—overview. This Practice Note outlines the amendments to Practice Directions contained in the 94th Making Document dated 30 January 2018, which took effect on Wednesday 7 February 2018. The following Practice Directions are amended: Practice Direction 8A— Alternative Procedure for Claims Practice Direction 59— Circuit Commercial Court Practice Direction 60— Technology and Construction Court Practice Direction 66— Crown Proceedings Practice Direction— Civil Recovery Proceedings Practice Direction— Business and Property Courts Practice Direction 8A— Alternative Procedure for...

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is no longer maintained and is provided for background reference only. In addition, some links may not lead to the provisions as they stood on the date this guidance was published. This year’s Dispute Resolution ‘starting and managing a civil claim’ annual review reflects on the stand-out developments of 2017 and signals what is anticipated for 2018, including: Continuing applications for relief from sanctions Privilege developments in SFO v Eurasian and inadvertent disclosure of privileged material Court guide updates concerning interim applications New hot-tubbing measures under Practice Direction 35, para 11 Settlement agreements Case law on applications for permission to appeal The CJC’s interim report on ADR Reviewing 2017 Case management What happened? Courts, including the Court of Appeal, continue to address applications for relief from sanctions. In R ( Kaur) v The Secretary of State For The Home Department, the Court of Appeal considered its...

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is archived and no longer maintained. Jackson LJ’s ‘ Supplemental Report— Fixed Recoverable Costs’ In July 2017, Lord Justice Jackson issued a report after reviewing fixed recoverable costs ( FRC). Completed on schedule with input from 14 assessors, it sets out several recommendations, namely: rolling out a FRC regime across all fast-track matters creating an intermediate track to which FRC would attach, for cases of moderate complexity that would otherwise sit in the multi-track, valued up to £100,000 widening the current Aarhus Convention style capped-costs model from certain judicial review claims to encompass all judicial review claims For fuller discussion of Jackson LJ’s report, see News Analyses: Fixed recoverable costs report 2017—a summary of conclusions; Will Jackson’s fixed costs proposals deliver access to justice?; and Alert: Review of fixed recoverable costs...

This Practice Note reviews Part 36 offers in split trial proceedings, highlighting the extra considerations that apply when proposing or responding to a Part 36, with particular emphasis on disclosure and the mechanics of acceptance. In addition, CPR 36.12, CPR 36.16(3)(d) and CPR 36.16(4) set out further, specific provisions that apply to Part 36 offers in the context of split trials... Why have specific provision for split trial cases? CPR 36.2(3) makes clear that a party may advance a Part 36 offer in relation to the whole claim, a part of it, any discrete issue arising within a claim, counterclaim or other additional claim, or an appeal or cross‑appeal from a determination made at trial. It is therefore expected that parties may table Part 36 offers confined to particular issue(s), capable of being determined at separate hearings. Illustrations include offers dealing solely with...

The terms of an agreement can be so imprecise or indeterminate that they have no real meaning and are therefore not enforceable. Nevertheless, where parties have concluded a bargain, a court will seek to give that bargain effect. This Practice Note explains the nature of the certainty requirement and the ways in which courts have attempted to narrow its reach. For guidance on the general approach when assessing whether an enforceable contract exists and identifying its terms, see Practice Note: Forming enforceable contracts—the court’s general approach. Requirement of certainty—the basic principle A court will not enforce a contract that cannot be given a definite meaning ( G. Scammell & Nephew v Ouston). In Scammell, the House of Lords decided that an agreement to obtain goods ‘on hire-purchase’ was too uncertain to enforce because there were many varieties of hire-purchase operating on very different terms. As a...

This Practice Note provides guidance on the interpretation and application of the relevant provisions of the CPR when seeking a stay. Depending on the court handling your case, additional rules may apply—see: Court specific guidance. It addresses when the court may impose a stay and the steps to remove it. It also sets out situations in which a party might seek a stay, for example to facilitate: a challenge to jurisdiction in a cross-border dispute arbitral proceedings settlement discussions awaiting the result of other proceedings, including linked criminal cases time to meet a procedural step or court direction In some circumstances, CPR 15.11 provides for an automatic stay of the claim—see Practice Note: Stay of civil proceedings—automatic stay under CPR 15.11. For guidance on staying an order or judgment while an appeal is pending, see Practice Note: Grounds for...