header-logo header-logo

Putting to proof

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

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll