header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

Civil way: 17 May 2019

© Copyright LexisNexis 2025. All Rights Reserved.
16 May 2019
Issue: 7840 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Civil way
printer mail-detail

Cut to the chase; thou shalt go CE; interesting mismatch; landlords still lamenting

PLEADING AWFUL

Net of cover pages, indices and appendices, the amended particulars of claim ran to 63 pages, the amended defence and counterclaim to 75 pages, the amended reply and defence to counterclaim to 76 pages and the draft amended defence and counterclaim to 91 pages. Longer than they should have been. That was the verdict of Pepperall J in Essex County Council v UBB Waste (Essex) (Ltd [2019] EWHC 819 (TCC) (judgment 19 pages) on an application for permission to reamend the defence and counterclaim. Prolixity risked losing sight of the purpose of statements of case. The usual expectation was that parties should be able to plead their cases in no more than 25 pages. CPD PD16 para 1.4 provided that if ‘exceptionally’ a statement of case exceeded 25 pages, an appropriate short summary should also be filed and served. The Commercial Court Guide drew attention to the usual limit and required parties to seek permission before filing a

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Law Society calls for clarity on AML
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
NLJ this week: Turning corporate liability into opportunity
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
NLJ this week: A prince no more?
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
NLJ this week: Shareholder secrecy sunk
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
NLJ this week: The expanding remit of national security law
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll