header-logo header-logo

04 June 2010
Issue: 7397 / Categories: Case law , Judicial line , In Court
printer mail-detail

Putting to proof

In a claim in tort, is the defendant not entitled to put the claimant to proof without pleading a positive case for the defence without judgment being entered against him on allocation?

In a claim in tort, is the defendant not entitled to put the claimant to proof without pleading a positive case for the defence without judgment being entered against him on allocation?

The aim of the CPR was to do away with bare denials. CPR 16 expressly states that where the defendant denies an allegation he must state his reasons for doing so and, if he intends to put forward a different version of events from that given by the claimant, he must state his own version.

The defendant may be the Motor Insurers Bureau or a Road Traffic Act insurer which only has the claimant’s version of events on which to rely and effectively wants to put the claimant to proof. The court may permit it to do so: it may not. It will depend on the strength of the evidence: does

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

Maguire Family Law—Jennifer Hudec, Ciara Florey, Alice Ferguson & Ruth Wynn

Maguire Family Law—Jennifer Hudec, Ciara Florey, Alice Ferguson & Ruth Wynn

Maguire Family Law announces partner promotion and new hires amid a record year for enquiries

Switalskis—Rebecca Parry & Hannah Gamble

Switalskis—Rebecca Parry & Hannah Gamble

Switalskis wills and probate team extends reach with two appointments

Withers—Sophie Barrett-Brown

Withers—Sophie Barrett-Brown

Withers drives further growth in its UK immigration team with new partner Sophie Barrett-Brown

NEWS
Restrictions on workplace non-disclosure agreements could make settlements slower, more complex and more expensive when reforms expected in 2027 take effect
Private prosecutors face closer scrutiny under Crown Prosecution Service guidance designed to strengthen accountability and consistency when intervention is requested
Foreign states cannot necessarily claim immunity for cyber operations launched abroad against computers in Britain, following a divided Supreme Court ruling
Defendants who make unsupported complaints about their lawyers risk losing legal aid while confiscation proceedings continue without representation
Lawyers advising Russian clients face different sanctions restrictions across the UK, EU and US, despite their shared objective of increasing pressure on Russia
back-to-top-scroll