header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
16 May 2019
Issue: 7840 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Civil way
printer mail-detail

Civil way: 17 May 2019

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

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
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
LexisNexis Legal Awards 2026—the winners!
The winners of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2026 have now been announced, marking another outstanding celebration of excellence, innovation, and impact across the legal profession
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll