When a claim form is served on the defendant, they have several options:
A defendant must file an acknowledgment of service within 14 days after service of the claim form. This applies whether the claim form is served within or outside the jurisdiction.
Acknowledgment of service is completed by filing the appropriate form (Form N9 or N9A) with the court. Key points:
If the defendant has a solicitor acting for them in the proceedings, service on the solicitor constitutes effective service. The solicitor may file acknowledgment of service on behalf of the defendant. This simplifies the process as most solicitors will acknowledge service promptly while considering the defence.
Time to file defence depends on acknowledgment:
The acknowledgment must indicate whether the defendant intends to defend all or part of the claim. If intending to dispute jurisdiction, this must be specified. A defendant who intends to defend must file a defence within the applicable time limit or risk default judgment.
A defendant may admit the whole or part of a claim. Admission can be made by filing an admission form or by serving a notice of admission. The admission must specify whether the defendant admits liability only, or both liability and the amount claimed.
A full admission admits both liability and the amount claimed. This is appropriate when the defendant accepts they owe the money claimed or are responsible for the breach/damage. Upon full admission, the claimant can enter judgment for the admitted amount.
A part admission admits some but not all of the claim. Common scenarios include:
When admitting liability, the defendant can propose payment arrangements:
For part admission, the defendant must:
"Admission without admission" is a settlement technique where the defendant pays the claim without formally admitting liability. This can be useful for commercial reasons where liability is disputed but settlement is preferable. The payment is made "without prejudice" to the defendant's position.
Where a defendant admits part of a claim, the claimant may enter judgment for the admitted amount. The claimant requests judgment by filing a request with the court. The court will determine the payment terms based on the defendant's proposal and circumstances.
Defence must be filed within specific time limits:
The defence must follow Practice Direction 16 requirements:
For each allegation in the particulars, the defence must:
A bare denial is insufficient. PD 16 paragraph 12.3 requires:
The defence should set out the defendant's case clearly. It must:
Particulars provide detail for the claim. The defence must respond to these specifics. If the claim alleges breach of contract on specific dates, the defence must address those dates. If the claim specifies damages calculations, the defence must respond to those figures.
A defence may be amended with the court's permission or with written consent of all parties. Before service of defence, amendments can be made without permission. After service, CPR 17.4 applies - permission needed unless it amends to correct a mistake.
Failing to file a defence on time has serious consequences:
Under CPR 3.4, the court may strike out a statement of case for non-compliance with rules or court orders. This includes failing to file a defence on time. The court may also strike out for disclosing no reasonable grounds for defending the claim.
A defendant may make a counterclaim against the claimant. The counterclaim arises out of the same or closely related facts as the claim. It is served with the defence and follows the same format as particulars of claim.
Counterclaims can be brought against parties other than the claimant if:
The counterclaim must comply with the same requirements as a claim:
Counterclaims are typically filed with the defence. If filed later, court permission may be required. The counterclaim follows its own procedural timetable but usually proceeds alongside the main claim through to trial.
The original claimant becomes a defendant to the counterclaim and must file a defence. The same time limits apply - 14 days from service of counterclaim (or 28 days if no acknowledgment). The defence to counterclaim addresses the allegations made in the counterclaim.
A counterclaim may be discontinued under CPR Part 38, similar to a claim. The counterclaimant files a notice of discontinuance. However, discontinuance may affect costs - the court may order the discontinuing party to pay the other side's costs.
A defendant may dispute the court's jurisdiction on several grounds:
A defendant wishing to dispute jurisdiction must file an acknowledgment of service indicating this intention, then file an application notice under CPR 11. The application must be made within 14 days of filing the acknowledgment.
Jurisdiction challenges must be made promptly:
When jurisdiction is disputed, proceedings on the merits are stayed. The court first determines whether it has jurisdiction. If jurisdiction is upheld, the defendant must then file a defence. If jurisdiction is rejected, the claim may be struck out or transferred to another court.
The Court of Justice of the European Union held that a party challenging jurisdiction must do so promptly and in accordance with procedural rules. Failure to follow the correct procedure results in loss of right to challenge jurisdiction.
If a defendant fails to file an acknowledgement or defence within the time limit, the claimant may request judgment in default. This is done by filing a request with the court using the appropriate procedure.
Default judgment can be entered when:
Default judgment can be entered for:
To obtain default judgment, the claimant must:
Default judgment includes interest from the date the claim arose until payment. The rate is typically 8% above base rate (statutory interest) under the Senior Courts Act 1981, unless a contract specifies a different rate.
Once default judgment is entered, it can be enforced like any other judgment. Enforcement options include writs of control, charging orders, attachment of earnings, and statutory demands. The judgment creditor must wait 14 days before enforcing unless the court orders otherwise.
CPR 13.3 allows a defendant to apply to set aside or vary a judgment entered in default. Grounds include: (1) default judgment was entered when defendant had filed acknowledgment or defence in time; (2) defendant had good reason for failing to file acknowledgement or defence; (3) there is some other good reason.
Under CPR 13.3(1), judgment may be set aside if it was entered when the defendant had filed an acknowledgment or defence within the time limit. This covers administrative errors where the court or claimant missed that a response had been filed.
Under CPR 13.3(2), judgment may be set aside if the defendant had a good reason for failing to file acknowledgment or defence. Good reason might include illness, family emergency, or other exceptional circumstances. Mere oversight or busy schedule is insufficient.
An application to set aside default judgment must be made "promptly." There is no fixed deadline, but delays of months will usually be unacceptable. The court considers the reason for delay and the prejudice to the claimant. Applications should ideally be made within days or weeks.
When setting aside default judgment, the court may:
To set aside default judgment:
A claimant may discontinue all or part of a claim at any time before judgment is entered or settlement approved. Discontinuance is effected by filing a notice of discontinuance (Form N279) and serving it on all parties.
The notice of discontinuance must:
Discontinuance before defence: The claimant can discontinue without permission and without costs liability. Discontinuance after defence: The claimant can still discontinue but the defendant is entitled to their costs unless the court orders otherwise.
Costs of discontinuance depend on timing:
A defendant may discontinue a counterclaim using the same procedure as a claimant. The same costs principles apply - if the counterclaim is discontinued after a defence to counterclaim has been filed, the claimant (as defendant to counterclaim) may be entitled to costs.
A Tomlin order is a method of settlement that keeps terms confidential. It consists of two parts: (1) an agreed order staying proceedings on terms agreed, and (2) a schedule containing the settlement terms which is not open to public inspection. If terms are breached, the claimant can apply to lift the stay and enter judgment.
A consent order is an agreement approved by the court and embodied in a court order. Unlike a Tomlin order, consent orders are public documents. They specify what the parties have agreed and are enforceable as court orders.
Part 36 offers are formal settlement offers with significant costs consequences. If the offeree rejects a Part 36 offer and fails to beat it at trial, they face severe costs penalties including indemnity costs and enhanced interest. Part 36 offers must meet specific formal requirements.
Calderbank offers are "without prejudice save as to costs" offers. They are less formal than Part 36 offers and don't carry automatic costs consequences, but the court may consider them when awarding costs. Named after Calderbank v Calderbank [1975].
Parties can settle by agreement without any formal order. This is typically documented in a settlement agreement which releases both parties from further claims related to the dispute. The settlement agreement is a contract between the parties.
If the defendant fails to respond within the applicable time limit, the claimant can enter judgment in default. This means the defendant loses the opportunity to present their case, present evidence, or contest the claim. The judgment is binding and enforceable.
Under CPR 3.4, the court may strike out a statement of case (including defence) if it fails to comply with rules or court orders. Inactivity may also lead to striking out. Strike out means the case proceeds without the struck party's participation.
A defendant who fails to respond may face indemnity costs orders. Indemnity basis is higher than the standard basis and requires the defaulting party to pay nearly all of the successful party's costs. This reflects the court's disapproval of non-compliance.
The court may draw adverse inferences from a party's silence or failure to provide evidence. Under the Civil Evidence Act 1995, the court may draw such inferences as appear proper when a party fails to provide evidence they could reasonably be expected to provide.