header-logo header-logo

06 May 2020
Issue: 7885 / Categories: Legal News , Profession
printer mail-detail

NLJ this week: The truth will out

Extra wording has been added to the statement of truth―the verification that a witness or party believes their statement to be true, which is required by many court documents

As of 6 April, every statement of truth must carry extra wording to the effect that the maker of the statement understands that they may be liable for contempt of court if their statement contains falsehoods. The changed format, introduced with the 113th update to Practice Direction Amendments, can be found in Practice Direct 22.

Writing in NLJ , Peter Thompson QC, general editor of the Civil Court Practice (the Green Book), assesses the need for such a change, and what difference it may make.

Thompson warns that, as of 6 April, ‘the legal representative has an additional duty, which is to warrant that the litigant understands the consequences of misleading the court by an untruth.

‘For a proper understanding the litigant should have committal proceedings explained and should be advised as to the various kinds of punishment that await the contemnor. What if the representative fails to give such advice?... Such a dereliction of duty would expose the legal representative (but not the litigant) to punishment for contempt under CPR 32.14. Practitioners beware!’

Read more of Peter Thompson’s article, ‘The truth, the whole truth and nothing like the truth’ .

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll