Drafting the particulars of claim This Practice Note provides guidance on the interpretation and application of the relevant provisions of the CPR. Depending on the court in which your matter is proceeding, you may also need to be mindful of additional provisions—see further below. This Practice Note provides guidance on drafting the particulars of claim. It should be read in conjunction with Practice Note: Drafting statements of case, which provides guidance on drafting statements of case in general, including formatting requirements, the need for a statement of truth, and electronic filing of statements of case. Particulars of claim—part of claim form or separate document? The particulars of claim can be included in the claim form or attached to the claim form as a separate document (CPR 7.4). If the particulars of claim are in a separate document they must either be served with the claim form, or within 14 days after service of the claim form; in any event, they must be served no later than the latest date for service of the claim form (CPR 7.4). In addition, the claim form must state that the particulars of claim will follow (CPR 16.2(2)). Particulars of claim served separately to the claim form must include the name of the court in which the claim is proceeding, the claim number, the title of the proceedings and the claimant’s address for service (CPR PD
Witness statements and other factual evidence—status, use and immunity This Practice Note provides guidance on the interpretation and application of the relevant provisions of the CPR. Depending on the court in which your matter is proceeding, you may also need to be mindful of additional provisions—see further Court specific guidance below. In particular, this Practice Note provides guidance on the status of witness statements and draft witness statements. It looks at the position on the use of factual evidence in subsequent proceedings, as well as the admissibility of other tribunals’ factual findings. Judicial notice is also considered, as is witness immunity from suit, or ‘privilege’ under Stanton and Taylor v SFO, the burden of proof and possible reforms. Burden of proof Under English law, where a party asserts a particular fact which is not self-evident, it has to prove it (Robins v National Trust as cited in Ball v Ball). It has been recognised by the courts that the type of factual allegation will have a bearing on the evidence required to prove it, namely ‘the more serious, or the less likely, an allegation of fact appears to be, so the evidence in support of it will require to be correspondingly more cogent and persuasive’ (Ma v St George's Healthcare NHS Trust at para , cited in Serafin v Malkiewicz at para ). If the party bearing the burden of
Discover our 33 Practice Notes on CEA
Can witnesses in civil proceedings decline to provide answers that might lead to a criminal trial and is there a duty to draw that to their attention? In answering this Q&A, we have assumed that this Q&A is referring to the privilege against self-incrimination. Privilege against self-incrimination arises from a number of different protections for defendants and witnesses at common law (R v Director of the Serious Fraud Office, ex p Smith at para ). As a general rule, a person should not be compelled to say anything which might tend to bring him into the peril and possibility of being convicted of a criminal offence (Lamb v Munster). This means that a person may refuse to answer any question or produce any document if to do so would tend to expose him to proceedings for an offence (Maloney v Bartley) or for the recovery of a penalty (Section 14(1) of Civil Evidence Act 1968 (CEA 1968)). For more information, see Practice Note: Privilege against self-incrimination. See also Commentaries: Privileges of witnesses: Halsbury's Laws of England  and When a witness can refuse to answer: Halsbury's Laws of England . The rule applies even if a negative answer will not imperil the person concerned (East India Co v Campbell). In the case of R v The Institute of Chartered Accountants of England and Wales, Ex parte Nawaz, Sedley J
What is the approach to be taken when challenging a spent criminal conviction in public children care proceedings in relation to contact, with reference to relevant case law? A spent conviction is a conviction which, pursuant to the provisions of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 (ROA 1974), is treated as being ignored, for many purposes (such as employment) after a specified period of time. That period is established based upon the sentence given, rather than the offence. The legislative purpose behind ROA 1974 is to provide that, for most purposes, the fact of a criminal conviction should not unduly affect the offender once a period of rehabilitation has passed. Ordinarily in the scope of many court proceedings, the fact of the spent conviction need not be disclosed. A spent criminal conviction will not show up on a basic criminal record check, but would be revealed by the basic or enhanced criminal record check that would be carried out by the authority'>local authority initiating the care proceedings. In a public law Children Act 1989 (ChA 1989) case, there are a number of relevant parties, including in particular the father and the mother. Either parent may have previously been convicted of a crime. The period since which that crime has been committed may have led to the conviction having become a spent conviction for the purposes of ROA 1974.
See the 7 Q&As about CEA
Law360, London: The Irish government said on 17 August 2021 that it has drawn up laws to create a new independent corporate watchdog to investigate and prosecute white collar crime, with draft legislation timed for September 2021.
A round-up of EU competition law developments, including (amongst other things) the latest Commission decision under the State aid Temporary Framework for the coronavirus pandemic.
Read the latest 16 News articles on CEA
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.
**Trials are provided to all LexisNexis content, excluding Practice Compliance, Practice Management and Risk and Compliance, subscription packages are tailored to your specific needs. To discuss trialling these LexisNexis services please email customer service via our online form. Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK. We may terminate this trial at any time or decide not to give a trial, for any reason. Trial includes one question to LexisAsk during the length of the trial.
"In some areas of research there were also significant time savings. You get to what you are looking for more quickly, which all goes to the value of the product."
Access all documents on CEA
0330 161 1234