Inspection

Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis

'Inspection' is the stage in the disclosure process during which the parties physically see the documents that have been:

  1. •

    disclosed by the other parties to the litigation (and which they have not objected to your inspecting)

  2. •

    referred to in a party's statement of case, witness statements, witness summaries and affidavits—for further guidance, see Practice Note: Disclosure—inspection—Inspection of documents referred to in statements of case, witness statements

  3. •

    ordered to be specifically disclosed and/or inspected under CPR 31.12—for further information, see: Specific disclosure and specific inspection—overview

As such, this is an important stage in the litigation and one which should be conducted thoroughly and carefully. For general guidance on inspection, see Practice Note: Disclosure: inspection, which provides guidance on:

  1. •

    documents that can be inspected

  2. •

    how to make a written request for inspection under CPR 31.15(a)

  3. •

    the circumstances in which it may not be possible to inspect disclosed documents under CPR 31.3 and CPR 31.19

  4. •

    how to make an application for specific inspection under CPR 31.12

  5. •

    how inspection takes place under CPR 31.15 (considering, among other things, inspection of original documents, copy documents and electronic documents)

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Existing user? Sign-in TAKE A FREE TRIAL
Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Dispute Resolution News

CGAP of the HCCH releases conclusions and decisions from March 2026 meeting

The Council on General Affairs and Policy (CGAP) of the Hague Conference on Private International Law (HCCH) has released the Conclusions & Decisions adopted at its meeting held from 3–6 March 2026, which was attended by over 560 participants. The report notes the final report concluding the work of the Working Group on the feasibility of a possible Convention on the Recognition of Judgments on Legal Parentage and continued progress on the Jurisdiction Project, with a decision to be taken in 2027 on whether to advance it to a Special Commission. CGAP also mandated the establishment a new Working Group to consider a possible convention on the cross-border recognition and enforcement of protection orders, in addition several expert and working groups were tasked with continuing their work on central bank digital currencies, carbon markets, digital tokens and the financial aspects of intercountry adoption. CGAP also approved various documents and tools to assist in the implementation and operation of HCCH Conventions, including a draft Cooperation Request Recommended Model Form under the 1996 Child Protection Convention and a Good Practices document relating to the 1965 Service, 1970 Evidence and 1980 Access to Justice Conventions. Ms Yael Weiner (Israel) was elected as the new Chair, succeeding Judge Marcelo De Nardi (Brazil).

What is ‘manifest error’ in expert determination? The Court of Appeal provides guidance (WH Holding Ltd v London Stadium LLP)

Dispute Resolution analysis: Expert determination clauses typically provide for narrow grounds to challenge the expert’s determination, often limited to ‘manifest error’. In this appeal, the appellant successfully challenged the High Court’s decision to overturn an expert determination on the grounds of manifest error. The Court of Appeal’s decision provides important guidance on the threshold for ‘manifest error’ and how the courts will approach challenges to expert determination. Written by Andrew Judkins, counsel at Norton Rose Fulbright LLP.

Court’s inherent jurisdiction and injunctive relief in harassment cases (Titan v Okunola)

Dispute Resolution analysis: This case concerned the court’s power to grant an injunction to restrain a litigant from sending abusive communications to an opposing party’s legal team. The High Court dismissed the application, stating that there was no ‘sound jurisdictional basis’ for such relief. The Court of Appeal held this was wrong: the court does have inherent jurisdiction at common law to protect the integrity of its own proceedings. However, the court agreed that refusal of the injunction was appropriate, as there was no ongoing risk and other discretionary factors weighed against relief. The judgment provides guidance for practitioners considering how to address disruptive litigation conduct. It clarifies the scope of the court’s inherent jurisdiction where behaviour poses a serious risk to the administration of justice. Where the conduct falls short of contempt, practitioners seeking such injunctions must also consider the impact of Article 10 ECHR, section 12 HRA, and litigation immunity. The case further highlights appropriate procedural routes and key discretionary factors relevant to injunctive relief. Written by Sarah Ellington, partner at Watson Farley & Williams LLP.

Dispute Resolution weekly highlights—5 March 2026

This week's edition of Dispute Resolution weekly highlights includes: analysis of a number of key DR developments and key judicial decisions including the publication from the Courts and Tribunals Judiciary of the updated version of the Equal Treatment Bench Book and the Court of Appeal decisions in Fridman v Agrofirma Oniks LLC (cross-border service) and Siniakovich v Hassan-Soudey (limitation); dates for your diary; details of our most recently published content; and other information of general interest to dispute resolution practitioners.

View Dispute Resolution by content type :  
News
Practice notes
Precedents
Q&As

Popular documents

Bankers Trust orders

Bankers Trust ordersThis Practice Note explains the court’s ability to make a Bankers Trust order and the nature of such an order. It examines the origins of this equitable jurisdiction; and describes the requirements to be shown for the court to make such an order. The guidance will also address

Single joint experts

Single joint expertsThis Practice Note explains when you might choose or be ordered to appoint a single joint expert (SJE) (under CPR 35.1 and CPR 35.2(2)). It looks at selection, appointment, instruction, conduct and fees and track and court specific guidance. Guidance is also given on how to

Collateral use of documents in civil proceedings

Collateral use of documents in civil proceedingsThis Practice Note provides guidance on what, if any, collateral or subsequent use can be made of documents disclosed during the course of civil proceedings and witness statements. This is often referred to as the ‘collateral purpose rule’ and

Disclosure Scheme—Initial Disclosure

Disclosure Scheme—Initial DisclosureThis Practice Note considers the provision of Initial Disclosure with a party’s statement of case under the Disclosure Scheme in operation in the Business and Property Courts (B&PCs) under CPR PD 57AD. It considers what must be provided, the obligations on the
Bankers Trust orders

Bankers Trust orders

Bankers Trust ordersThis Practice Note explains the court’s ability to make a Bankers Trust order and the nature of such an order. It examines the origins of this equitable jurisdiction; and describes the requirements to be shown for the court to make such an order. The guidance will also address

Single joint experts

Single joint experts

Single joint expertsThis Practice Note explains when you might choose or be ordered to appoint a single joint expert (SJE) (under CPR 35.1 and CPR 35.2(2)). It looks at selection, appointment, instruction, conduct and fees and track and court specific guidance. Guidance is also given on how to

Collateral use of documents in civil proceedings

Collateral use of documents in civil proceedings

Collateral use of documents in civil proceedingsThis Practice Note provides guidance on what, if any, collateral or subsequent use can be made of documents disclosed during the course of civil proceedings and witness statements. This is often referred to as the ‘collateral purpose rule’ and

Disclosure Scheme—Initial Disclosure

Disclosure Scheme—Initial Disclosure

Disclosure Scheme—Initial DisclosureThis Practice Note considers the provision of Initial Disclosure with a party’s statement of case under the Disclosure Scheme in operation in the Business and Property Courts (B&PCs) under CPR PD 57AD. It considers what must be provided, the obligations on the