Statements of Case — SQE1 FLK1 Dispute Resolution

Particulars of claim land on a defendant company with eleven numbered allegations. The defence that comes back reads, in full: the Defendant denies each and every allegation in the Particulars of Claim and puts the Claimant to strict proof thereof. That is the whole document. Two of those eleven allegations are about documents the company wrote itself. Has that defence gained the defendant anything? No.

On some of those allegations it may have cost him the case before it starts. This is Statements of Case, and it is the part of civil litigation where the drafting is the law. What you put in these documents fixes what the court has to decide. Keep that one-sentence defence in mind. We are coming back for it.

Here is the route. First why statements of case exist at all. Then the claim form, and the particulars that follow it. Then the defence, which is where most of the marks are. Then the reply, and counterclaims under Part 20. Then requests for further information, and standard disclosure. And finally amendments, including the one that matters most, amending after limitation has run out.

Start with what these documents are for. Three jobs. They identify the precise matters the court must decide. They give fair notice, so no party is surprised at trial. And they enable a proper response, so the other side can admit or deny specific allegations. Everything that follows is those three jobs in detail.

The claim form first, and the rule is CPR 16.2. It must contain a concise statement of the nature of the claim. It must specify the remedy sought. And for a money claim it must contain a statement of value complying with CPR 16.3. If the particulars are not served with it, the form must say they will follow.

Two points people get wrong here. First, a claim form is itself a statement of case, under CPR 2.3, so it must be verified by a statement of truth under CPR 22.1. Second, the concise statement of the nature of the claim comes from CPR 16.2. It does not come from CPR 7.3. That is the separate rule permitting one claim form to start two or more claims.

And concise does not mean uninformative. The statement is a summary, not the full particulars, but it must tell the defendant the general nature of the claim and identify the cause of action. A claim form saying only that damages are claimed gives no notice at all.

The remedy sought has to be specified: damages, whether a figure or to be assessed, specific performance, an injunction, a declaration. Interest too. Pre-judgment interest on debts and damages is discretionary, under s.35A of the Senior Courts Act 1981. In the County Court it is s.69 of the County Courts Act 1984. There is no fixed statutory rate.

Once judgment is entered it changes. A judgment debt carries a flat 8%, under the Judgments Act 1838. And a commercial debt may attract base rate plus 8% under the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. Three different interest regimes, and the exam likes to see whether you know which one is running.

The statement of value, under CPR 16.3. For a money claim the claimant states the amount claimed. Then either the band it expects to recover or, where it genuinely cannot say, that it cannot say. A High Court claim must also state the ground on which it may be brought there. But notice what the statement of value does not do. It does not allocate the claim.

It drives the court fee and the court's provisional view. Allocation follows the directions questionnaire, under CPR Part 26, once a defence is filed. That gap between value and allocation is worth remembering.

Particulars of claim next, under CPR 16.4. They must include a concise statement of the facts on which the claimant relies. A statement of any interest claimed and the basis of it. And the grounds for any claim to aggravated, exemplary or provisional damages.

And here is the line that generates more marks than any other in this topic. Particulars plead the material facts, not the evidence by which those facts are to be proved. What happened, not how you will prove it. The defendant undertook to build a conservatory, owed a duty to work with reasonable skill and care, failed to waterproof the foundation, and water penetrated the property. Those are material facts. The surveyor's report is evidence, and it does not belong there.

PD 16 adds requirements for particular kinds of claim. Attach a copy of a written agreement. Set out the words used in an oral one. In a personal injury claim, give the claimant's date of birth and brief details of the injuries. Add a schedule of past and future loss, and a medical report where medical evidence is relied on.

Two patterns to carry into the exam. A contract claim particularises the essential terms, the breach, and the loss. A negligence claim particularises the duty, the breach, the causation and the damage. Run the elements of the cause of action and plead each one. The commonest failure is pleading a breach and never linking it to the damage.

The defence, and this is where the marks live. CPR 16.5 requires the defendant to state their case on each allegation. Three options for each one. Admit it. Deny it. Or say they are unable to admit or deny it and require the claimant to prove it. General denials are not permitted.

Which brings back our one-sentence defence. A denial on its own is not enough. CPR 16.5 requires the defendant to state the reasons for each denial, and to give his own version wherever he intends to put forward a different account. Denying that the roof was repaired negligently is worthless. Saying the repairs were done properly and the leak came from a pre-existing defect in the structure is a defence.

Now the sting, and it is the reason a blanket denial is worse than useless. Under CPR 16.5 a defendant who fails to deal with an allegation is taken to admit it, subject to the exceptions the rule itself sets out. Your defence says nothing about paragraph 8. What have you just done? Admitted it.

The third option needs care. A defendant may plead that it is unable to admit or deny an allegation, but only where it genuinely is unable, and it must give reasons. The Court of Appeal has set the test. The defendant is unable to admit or deny where the truth is neither within its actual knowledge, nor capable of rapid ascertainment from documents at its ready disposal. Actual knowledge includes knowledge attributed to a company.

Work through what that means. A company is sued over an incident at a depot. Nobody still employed was there and the manager of the day left long ago. But the signed checklists for that very shift sit in the company's own archive, indexed by date. They would settle the point in an afternoon. Can it plead that it is unable to admit or deny? No. Its own records are at its ready disposal.

The other half of that ruling is just as useful. There is no general duty to make reasonable enquiries of third parties before pleading a non-admission. Chasing a former employee is not required. Reading your own files is. And a defence containing bare denials only may be struck out under CPR 3.4, though the court will usually allow an amendment first.

The reply next, and it is optional. Under CPR 16.7, if the claimant files no reply to the defence, the defendant must prove the matters raised in it. So a client who panics that saying nothing will be taken as accepting the defendant's account has it backwards. File no reply. Have you admitted anything? No.

The rule goes further. A claimant who does file a reply but does not deal with a matter in the defence is still not taken to admit it. File one where the defence raises a new matter the particulars do not address, or where there is a counterclaim to answer. If you do file one, under CPR 15.8 it goes in with the directions questionnaire and is served at the same time.

Counterclaims, under Part 20. A defendant may counterclaim against the claimant without permission provided it is filed with the defence. That is CPR 20.4. At any other time permission is needed. The counterclaim goes in the defence document but is treated as a separate claim.

And here is the misconception the examiners rely on. Nothing in Part 20 requires a counterclaim against the claimant to arise out of the same facts as the claim. An unrelated loan can be counterclaimed in a consultancy dispute. The connection matters, but only as case management. Under CPR 20.9 the court may have regard to it in deciding whether the two are dealt with together, and it can order separate trials. A counterclaim against someone not already a party needs the court's permission.

Part 18, requests for further information. A party may request further information about another party's statement of case. The request must be proportionate and must relate to that statement of case. PD 18 adds that it must be necessary to understand the case. It must not be a fishing expedition, or a way of getting evidence that belongs in disclosure.

Standard disclosure, under CPR 31.6, is the neighbour of all this. Four categories. Documents you rely on. Documents that adversely affect your own case. Documents that adversely affect another party. And documents that support another party. Note the middle two. You disclose what hurts you. And the duty is continuing.

Amendments last, and the timing is everything. Under CPR 17.1 a party may amend a statement of case without anybody's permission at any time before it has been served on another party. Once it has been served, the same rule requires the written consent of all the other parties, or the permission of the court.

The court weighs why the amendment is needed and its timing. Then any prejudice to other parties, whether costs can compensate for it, and whether the amendment has a real prospect of success. Amend early and none of that arises.

The hard case is amending after limitation has expired. Under CPR 17.4 a new claim can be added or substituted only if it arises out of the same or substantially the same facts as a claim already in issue. It then relates back to the date of the original claim form.

A claimant injured in an accident pleaded one version of how it happened. The defence pleaded a different version. After limitation had run out she applied to amend, to say that even on the defendant's own account he was negligent. The Court of Appeal read the rule compatibly with the right to a fair trial and allowed it. The new case arose out of substantially the same facts as were already in issue. Goode v Martin, from 2001.

And the late amendment. Claimants applied to amend their particulars very late, and the defendant resisted on prejudice. The Court of Appeal held that a heavy burden lies on the party seeking a late amendment. He must show the strength of the new case and why justice to all parties requires it, and the court weighs prejudice to the other party and to other litigants. Swain-Mason v Mills & Reeve, from 2011.

A word on how SQE1 tests this. You will not be asked to recall case names or rule numbers. You get a scenario, five answers, and one instruction: pick the best. In this topic the rules are the substance, so learn what each document must contain and what happens if it does not.

If you keep only three. CPR 16.5, which makes a denial worthless without reasons and your own version, and turns silence into an admission. Goode v Martin, where an amendment after limitation was allowed because it arose out of substantially the same facts. And Swain-Mason v Mills & Reeve, where a late amendment carries a heavy burden and usually indemnity costs.

Four traps the examiners set. One: the five failures in particulars of claim. Being too vague when specific dates and amounts were available. Including evidence rather than facts. Overloading with legal argument. Missing an essential element of the cause of action. And being inconsistent with the claim form.

Two: statements of truth. Every statement of case needs one, and that includes the claim form, because a claim form is a statement of case. The particulars, the defence and any reply all need one too. It is an easy mark and an easy one to lose.

Three: the reply you did not need. Unnecessary replies add costs and can be counterproductive. You need no reply where the defence simply denies allegations, or where you would only be restating your case. Silence admits nothing, so the reply must earn its place.

Four: who pays for an amendment. The party amending will usually pay the costs of the amendment, including the other side's costs of responding. Standard basis normally, indemnity basis where it came late. Amending is rarely free.

Quick check, and it is that defence. Particulars of claim in a contract dispute make eleven numbered allegations. A contract made on stated terms. Four consignments delivered late. Notice given. A lost sub-sale. Two of the eleven concern documents the defendant company itself wrote. The defence reads, in full: the Defendant denies each and every allegation and puts the Claimant to strict proof thereof.

Does that defence comply with the requirements for the contents of a defence? Three candidate answers. One: yes, because it denies each allegation and so deals with all of them. Two: no, because a defendant who denies an allegation must state his reasons. Three: yes, because a defendant may require the claimant to prove every allegation. Pause here if you want a moment.

The answer is two. CPR 16.5 requires a defence to state which allegations are denied, which the defendant is unable to admit or deny but requires the claimant to prove, and which are admitted. It then requires reasons for each denial. This defence does none of it.

Why the others fail. One, because a blanket denial does not deal with the allegations at all. Under CPR 16.5 a defendant who fails to deal with an allegation is taken to admit it. On the two about the company's own documents, this defence may achieve the opposite of what was intended. Three, because the right to put a claimant to proof is confined to allegations the defendant genuinely cannot admit or deny.

Five things to take away. One: the claim form under CPR 16.2 gives the nature of the claim, the remedy sought and, for money claims, a statement of value under CPR 16.3. It needs a statement of truth like any other statement of case. Two: particulars plead material facts, never the evidence that proves them.

Three: a defence must answer every allegation, a denial needs reasons and the defendant's own version, and failing to deal with an allegation is taken as admitting it. That is what our one-sentence defence got wrong. Four: a reply is optional, and filing none admits nothing.

Five: amend before the statement of case has been served and you need nobody's permission. After that it is consent or the court. And after limitation, only where the new claim arises out of substantially the same facts. Next time, Interim Applications.

Practise this topic with exam-style questions at sqe1prep.co.uk. This episode is for education and exam revision only, not legal advice, and we are not affiliated with or endorsed by the SRA or Kaplan.