The final decision of the court in a claim.

A judgment by default is a court order determining a claim where the defendant has failed to take a required procedural step, usually failing to acknowledge service, lodge a notice of intention to defend or file a defence within the prescribed time limits. It allows the claimant to obtain judgment without a contested hearing.In England and Wales and Northern Ireland, default judgment is primarily governed by the Civil Procedure Rules and corresponding county court rules, distinguishing between judgment for a specified (liquidated) sum and for an unspecified amount, and between administrative and judicial entry of judgment. In Scotland, the broadly equivalent concept is decree in absence under the Ordinary Cause Rules and Simple Procedure Rules. In Ireland, default judgment procedures are set out in the Rules of the Superior Courts and Circuit Court Rules.Across these jurisdictions, a judgment by default can be set aside or varied on specified grounds, such as improper service, procedural irregularity, or where the defendant shows a real prospect of defending the claim and acts promptly. It is a key enforcement tool and a significant litigation risk where time limits are missed.

A judgment debt is the sum of money a party is ordered to pay under a court judgment or order (and, where registered or made an order of the court, a tribunal decision, arbitral award or foreign judgment). The expression is descriptive rather than a single statutory definition, though specific statutes and rules use it for particular purposes.Key features: it is enforceable unless stayed; interest may accrue at contractual or statutory rates; it can be assigned; and non‑payment may found insolvency proceedings. Typical enforcement includes seizure of goods, recovery from third parties, charges over property and earnings deductions.Jurisdictional use:- England & Wales: commonly used term; enforced by writ/warrant of control, third party debt orders, charging orders (and orders for sale), attachment of earnings, or insolvency.- Scotland: the equivalent is a debt constituted by decree or a “document of debt”, enforced by diligence (charge for payment, arrestment, earnings arrestment, attachment, inhibition).- Northern Ireland: enforced centrally through the Enforcement of Judgments Office using similar measures.- Ireland: enforced by sheriff execution, instalment/attachment of earnings orders, garnishee orders, and registration as a judgment mortgage.Limitation to enforce varies: generally six years in England & Wales and Northern Ireland, longer in Scotland (up to 20 years) and typically 12 years in Ireland.

The High Court has awarded damages to a claimant who was injured taking part in an outdoor activity challenge course at an outdoor activity centre. The risk of accident on the particular task was identified in the defendant’s risk assessment and its instructor training notes, but on the day there was a breach of the duty to adequately supervise and demonstrate the task and this breach caused the claimant’s accident.

Property Disputes analysis: On 11 March 2026, judgment was handed down in Crest Nicholson Regeneration Ltd v Calvert. Joanne Wicks KC of Wilberforce Chambers considers the matter.

TMT analysis: Well-known actor Johnny Depp (Mr Depp) brought a libel claim against the defendant publishers in relation to articles published by them across two days in April 2018, entitled ‘How can JK Rowling be “genuinely happy” casting wife beater Johnny Depp in the new Fantastic Beasts film?’ (and similar). The court found that the articles contained the meaning as contended by the defendants, namely that Mr Depp beat his wife, actress Amber Heard (Ms Heard), causing her to suffer significant injury and on occasion leading to her fearing for her life. Mr Justice Nicol analysed 14 alleged incidents of violence by Mr Depp and found 12 to be proved substantially true. On three such incidents, Ms Heard had feared for her life. Accordingly, the defendants had made good their truth defence under section 2 of the Defamation Act 2013 (DA 2013) and Mr Depp’s claim was dismissed. Written by Lily Walker-Parr, barrister at 5RB.

This Q&A raises the issue of the extent to which a guarantor of a former tenant’s obligations under a lease can be liable to the landlord after that tenant has assigned its interest. The common law rule was that the original tenant under a lease was liable on the covenants contained in it for the duration of the term. Even after assignment, the tenant remained liable and the extent of its protection was the strength of any indemnity an assignee had given. A guarantor of the original tenant was in the same position. If the landlord was taking proceedings against the original tenant or guarantor, then it would often be because either enforcement against the present tenant had been difficult or it was not seen as desirable to forfeit the lease while an original tenant or guarantor could be required

Foreign-registered company Where the only foreign element is the fact that the judgment debtor is registered abroad, but service took place within the jurisdiction, it is likely that the company also carries on its activities or business in England and Wales. Where the judgment is a domestic judgment, it is enforceable within England and Wales in the usual way. Enforcement against the assets If the company has assets within the jurisdiction, then enforcement

Restructuring & Insolvency analysis: The Supreme Court has given a controversial decision in Rubin v Eurofinance, limiting the enforceability of insolvency decisions made abroad in England and Wales. Mark Phillips QC of 3–4 South Square explains why many insolvency specialists will be disappointed.

Dispute Resolution analysis: Declarations should not be given without argument inter partes except in the clearest of cases, according to Master Matthews, who presided over the case of Goldcrest Distribution Limited v McCole and others. Aileen McErlean, barrister at Hardwicke Chambers and an expert in company and insolvency matters, talks us through the details.

TMT analysis: The Technology and Construction Court delivered judgment on 17 May 2024 in the long-standing dispute between Tata Consultancy Services Ltd (TCS) and the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS). This was one of The Lawyer’s Top 20 cases of 2023 and involved an eight week trial revolving around issues relating to delay. Bristows acted for the DBS, together with Simon Croall KC, Andrew Carruth and Will Mitchell of Quadrant Chambers. Anna Cook, partner at Bristows analyses key aspects of the judgment.

A judgment in personam upholds a right as against one or more identifiable people