Legal Practice Notes

This Practice Note outlines the points of dispute and reply required for the detailed assessment process. It clarifies what is meant by points of dispute and replies, how these documents can be varied where necessary, and what, if anything, the court may do. It also pinpoints the relevant service time limits and the issues that arise from any failure to comply. What are points of dispute? The receiving party prepares a bill of costs setting out the costs it seeks to recover under the detailed assessment procedure. The paying party must examine that bill and identify any items it contests. The paying party then records the challenged items in a document called the ‘points of dispute’ ( CPR 47.9(1)). Any other party to the detailed assessment proceedings may likewise object to items in their own ‘points of dispute’. Form of the points of...

This Practice Note sets out what a default costs certificate is, who may apply for one, the procedural steps they must follow, and the recovery of any associated costs. In addition, it explains how to apply for a default costs certificate to be set aside, or how to seek a stay of enforcement. The governing provisions are contained in CPR 47 and CPR PD 47. The default costs certificate route is not available in solicitor/client assessments ( CPR PD 46, para 6.8). What is a default costs certificate? A default costs certificate includes an order requiring payment of the costs to which it relates ( CPR 47.11(2)). It directs the full amount of the receiving party’s bill of costs to be paid, together with the sum prescribed by CPR PD 47 for the receiving party’s costs of commencing the detailed assessment. In effect, it brings the...

This Practice Note considers when an employment tribunal may order a party to pay a deposit as a condition of continuing in proceedings Where any part of a claim, response, or reply (including one answering an employer’s counterclaim) lacks a reasonable chance of success, the suitable step can be to strike it out: for more detail, see Practice Note: Striking out and unless orders in employment tribunal proceedings— Striking out where there is no reasonable prospect of success. That said, showing that a claim, response, or reply, in whole or in part, has no reasonable prospect is a demanding standard; the test is not met if the prospects are only questionable or poor where there remains a realistic, albeit slight, likelihood that the party concerned could prevail on the issue(s). If the strike‑out bar is not met, yet some or all of the claim,...

This Practice Note explains in detail the requirements and rules governing the delivery and service of documents throughout the course of employment tribunal proceedings. Documents may need to be sent or served: to the tribunal: see Sending to the tribunal, below to the parties to the proceedings: see Sending to parties, below to others who are not parties to the proceedings: see Sending to non-parties and other special addressees, below In each situation there are rules setting out the permitted method and place of delivery. At times the address specified by the rules cannot be ascertained, or is known but presents practical difficulties; in such circumstances an order may permit service by another means or method: see Problems with regular address—substituted service, below. The date on which a document is delivered is often particularly critical in assessing compliance with procedural requirements....

Introduction to delay and disruption A construction contract will usually set out the date by which the works must be finished (the 'completion date'). However, over the life of a construction project, events commonly arise that delay or disrupt progress, and may therefore hinder the contractor’s ability to achieve completion by the completion date. Delay and disruption are among the most frequent drivers of claims and disputes on construction projects. It is important to distinguish delay from disruption—in programme terms, this difference marks the line between critical and non-critical delay. Disruption is often, and wrongly, treated as the same as delay, and they are routinely discussed together (as 'delay and disruption') as though they were identical with identical consequences. Delay and disruption are, nonetheless, distinct concepts. Their implications are not the same. How either is addressed will depend on the particular cause in each...

Defending a tort claim—general considerations In practice, many actions are defended by arguing that the defendant owed no duty to the claimant, that no duty was breached, or that the chain of causation was interrupted. In any of these situations, the claimant has not established that the defendant is prima facie liable. For guidance on proving liability in negligence, see the following Practice Notes: Negligence—key elements to establish a negligence claim Negligence—when does a duty of care arise? Negligence—when is the duty of care breached? This Practice Note examines the defences capable of excusing a defendant from liability where prima facie liability has been shown. Limitation defences in tort claims Even where a duty existed and was breached, a claimant may still find their case opposed or struck out if the defence can demonstrate that the proceedings are...

This Practice Note outlines the principal defences that may arise in road traffic accidents ( RTAs), with particular emphasis on contributory negligence. Examples include failing to wear seat belts or helmets, incidents involving children, and cases where alcohol has been consumed. The Note also addresses unavoidable accidents, involuntary acts, latent defects, and the defence of illegality (or ex turpi causa). Contributory negligence is routinely advanced in RTA claims and guidance should be taken from the relevant case law. Where a claimant’s injuries are made worse by not wearing a seat belt, a typical reduction for contributory negligence falls within the range of 15% to 25%... Unavoidable accident A defendant can escape liability if they demonstrate that the accident could not have been avoided......

The standard range of defences, including limitation, is also generally open to a defendant in such proceedings. A defendant might dispute being in occupation or having control of the premises, or otherwise contend that no duty of care whatsoever was owed to the claimant, or that any such duty was not breached. They may further assert that, for the purposes of the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957 ( OLA 1957), the claimant was not a lawful visitor but a trespasser, such that only the narrower duty under the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1984 ( OLA 1984) applied. Alternatively, the defendant could entirely reject both visitor and trespasser status, alleging the claimant was on a public right of way, and thus no duty of care arose under either OLA 1957 or OLA 1984. An occupier might also raise the following potential defences where relevant and...

Defendant to raise their defence A number of defences may arise in road traffic prosecutions. These include: automatism insanity duress and necessity, and the 'hip flask' defence When a defendant intends to rely upon a particular defence, they must place sufficient material and evidence before the court to properly raise the issue for trial. This is the 'evidential burden'. It is separate from the legal burden of proof, which imposes an obligation on a party to prove a fact in issue. The prosecution ordinarily bears the legal burden of proof. See Practice Note: Burden and standard of proof in criminal proceedings. The evidential burden may be satisfied if the defendant enters the witness box and sets out their defence. Consequently, once the issue is raised by the defence, the onus then passes to the prosecution to prove, to the criminal standard (beyond...

Under the Defective Premises Act 1972 ( DPA 1972) A person undertaking work either: for, or connected with, providing a dwelling ( DPA 1972, s 1(1)); or concerning any part of a “relevant building”, being a building with one or more dwellings ( DPA 1972, s 2A); owes a duty to see that the work is carried out in a competent or, as appropriate, professional way, using suitable materials, so the dwelling is fit for human habitation. “ Fit for habitation” is not a freestanding obligation; it is the yardstick by which “competent”/“professional” execution and “suitable materials” are assessed. It is the measure by which workmanship and the appropriateness of materials are evaluated. Accordingly, liability under DPA 1972, ss 1(1) and 2A is strict: where the works or materials supplied have made the dwelling unfit for habitation, the defendant is in breach of the...

What duty is owed by a landlord under the Defective Premises Act 1972 ( DPA 1972)? This Practice Note explains the landlord’s obligations under the DPA 1972, the circumstances in which they arise, duties owed to others (including trespassers), whether disrepair is required, if awareness or notice of a defect is needed, and the effect of works during the tenancy. When the duty takes effect Obligations to third parties and trespassers The necessity for disrepair Whether knowledge or notification of a defect is required The position where works occur during the tenancy For guidance on duties under DPA 1972, sections 1(1) and 2A (the latter introduced by section 134 of the Building Safety Act 2022) for those undertaking work for or connected with providing a dwelling, or other work relating to a dwelling, how those obligations operate, and their...

If a default judgment has been entered against a defendant in error, the court is required to set it aside. CPR 13.2 specifies mandatory grounds; where these apply, the court has no discretion and must set aside the default judgment, regardless of the strength of any proposed defence. This Practice Note clarifies when the court is compelled to act and considers frequent arguments raised by defendants asserting that a default judgment must be set aside on mandatory grounds. For alternative, discretionary bases, see Practice Note: Setting aside default judgment—discretionary grounds ( CPR 13.3). For the procedure to apply, see Practice Note: Setting aside default judgment—making the application. For an overview of what constitutes a default judgment, see Practice Note: Obtaining default judgment—general principles. What are the mandatory grounds for setting aside default judgment? CPR 13.2 provides that the court must set aside a default judgment if the...

This Practice Note addresses the key practical steps that arise when pursuing a defamation claim, such as: pinpointing a defamatory statement; deciding whether it amounts to libel or slander; and evaluating the overall suitability of interim relief. It thoroughly reviews the effect of the Defamation Act 2013 ( DA 2013) on both claimants and defendants, and sets out practical tactics for the procedural conduct of a defamation case. Defamation Act 2013 Before DA 2013 came into force, defamation proceedings had a reputation for technicality and disproportionate cost, chiefly because arguments centred on the meaning of the impugned words. The government, reacting to a wave of negative media commentary that English defamation law unduly favoured claimants, enacted DA 2013. The Act brought in a suite of reforms, making defamation a tort grounded equally in common law and statute, and, through...

This Practice Note This Practice Note distils rulings on when restraint of trade provisions (restrictive covenants) in commercial and corporate agreements are enforceable. For fuller detail on restrictive covenants and the restraint of trade doctrine in commercial arrangements, also see Practice Note: Restrictive covenants and restraint of trade in commercial contracts. For a companion Practice Note outlining decisions on the enforceability of post-termination restraints (restrictive covenants) in employment contracts, see Practice Note: Decisions on post-termination restrictions and garden leave in employment contracts. This Practice Note also references certain key judgments reached under EU competition law. From 1 January 2021, EU competition law no longer applies directly in the UK. Where an agreement impacts trade within the UK, Chapter I of the Competition Act 1998 ( CA 1998) will govern. The Chapter I prohibition bans anti-competitive agreements and is modelled on Article 101 of the Treaty on the...

This Practice Note examines the usual suitability reasons for refusal and cancellation under the Immigration Rules, Part Suitability, including false representations, false information, false documents, relevant non‑disclosure, and the connected ground of deception. It also offers practical pointers on contesting refusals made on suitability grounds. See: Suitability grounds for refusal and re-entry bans—overview for details of the full replacement of the former Part 9 of the Immigration Rules by Part Suitability from 11 November 2025... Deception and false representations grounds Mandatory ( Deception) and discretionary ( False representations, etc) refusal grounds for current applications There is a mandatory basis to refuse entry clearance or permission where the decision‑maker is satisfied the applicant used deception by: making false representations, or supplying false documents or false information in relation to the application (whether or not it is relevant to the application), or failing to disclose...

Employee share scheme participants and shareholders This Practice Note considers the matters that arise on the death of a participant in both HMRC tax-advantaged schemes and a range of unapproved share scheme arrangements. It also examines the practical points connected with the death of an employee shareholder who may have obtained shares under those arrangements. Market practice Early Vesting As a matter of market practice, in most employee share plans, death is ordinarily treated as a 'good leaver' event (see Practice Note: Drafting leaver provisions in share plans— Different treatment for different types of leavers). This typically results in accelerated vesting or the ability to exercise awards being triggered. Where that applies, and the relevant scheme is an option plan, the deceased participant’s personal representatives are permitted to exercise options within a defined window (commonly 12 months after death). Likewise, options already vested will generally have to be...

This Practice Note examines matters arising when a party to a lease dies during the term, including the consequences for the lease, any termination rights that may emerge, how to serve notices on a deceased landlord or tenant or refer to them in proceedings, and the principle of survivorship. It also addresses what occurs on the death of a guarantor, and the approach to registration. Vesting in personal representatives Death of the tenant The lease does not determine on the death of a sole tenant. Rather, the term (fixed or periodic) vests in the tenant’s personal representatives ( PRs). It does not devolve under any Will or intestacy until expressly assigned. Where there is a Will, the executors take the lease immediately on the tenant’s death. If the tenant died intestate, or there are no validly appointed executors willing or able to act, the lease vests in the...

This Practice Note is for brands engaging influencers (or other talent) on social marketing and advertising campaigns in the UK. What constitutes an influencer? In the UK: Content amounts to an influencer ‘endorsement’ or advertisement where an influencer collaborates with a brand to create material for their own channel and: the influencer has received ‘payment’ from the brand for that content, and the brand exerts some level of ‘control’ over the content Both ‘payment’ and ‘control’ must be present for content to be an advertisement regulated by the Advertising Standards Authority ( ASA). If there is ‘payment’ but no ‘control’, consumer protection legislation applies, enforced by Trading Standards and the Competition and Markets Authority ( CMA). ‘ Payment’ is...

Practice Note This Practice Note outlines practical measures for managing persistent, sporadic, short-duration absences, as well as recurrent sickness absence or sick days. It addresses matters to be tackled at the start, such as whether an accurate attendance record exists, whether the absence is bona fide, underlying long-term health conditions, disability and the obligation to make reasonable adjustments, the employer’s absence/sickness rules, securing medical evidence, data protection considerations under Assimilated Regulation ( EU) 2016/679, UK General Data Protection Regulation ( UK GDPR) and commercial factors. It also reviews the relevance of the Acas Code of Practice and associated guidance, and sets out steps to take once an issue is apparent, including seeking the employee’s account for each absence, issuing a series of warnings, recognising improvement, using a flexible approach to address the issue, and handling medical reports. It lists...

Lookalike products and dupes are, by their nature, difficult for brand owners to deal with. They are designed to imitate, or to evoke, a famous or trending product, yet frequently avoid any clear branding cues for which the brand owner might hold registered rights. For example, a lookalike might mirror entirely the colour palette, overall appearance and tactile feel of the packaging of a renowned product, while adopting a different trade mark to sidestep liability. The difficulty in policing such products arises because, under UK law, there is no single, dedicated IP right tailored to address them. Instead, brand owners typically must piece together a mosaic of protections—copyright, passing off, and trade mark and design infringement—to prove the components of a claim against a copycat item. Makers and designers of lookalikes and dupes are, moreover, commonly sophisticated. They take care to steer clear of...