DR Track Allocation

Question 1

Structure for Track Allocation Application

Answer 1

1. Set out facts of the case
2. Identify the normal track (based on value)
   - small: £0 - £10,000
   - fast: £10,001 - £25,000
   - intermediate: £25,000 - £100,000
   - multi: £100,000 plus
3. Decide whether there is good reason to depart
4. Conclude

Question 2

What is the value of the claim

Answer 2

Decision based primarily, but not only, on the value of the claim

When assessing value: court disregards any claim for interest, costs, any amount not in dispute and any contributory negligence

Question 3

Scope of the tracks (beyond value)

Answer 3

Fast track:
a) trial 1 day max;
b) oral expert evidence one per party in two expert fields max

Intermediate track:
a) trial 3 days max;
b) oral expert evidence limited to two experts per party

Question 4

Advising the court on departing from the ‘normal rules’ for allocation

Answer 4

1. Normal track is determined by CPR on the VALUE of the claim
   - Value is not a single, determinative factor
   - Consider the other relevant factors as to whether ‘normal track’ should be departed from (length of trial / expert evidence / other factors)

Structure:
1. Provide what the ‘normal track’ is
2. Persuade the court as to why it should depart from the ‘normal track’ - taking into account other factors

Question 5

If the judge asks: shouldn’t departure from normal track be reserved for exceptional circumstances. Respond:

Answer 5

No, determination of track takes place with reference to the CPR and the overriding objective. Whilst the ‘normal track’ provides a starting point, the track system is intended to be judged on a case by case basis and it is not solely determined on one factor, such as value.

Therefore, the normal track can be departed from whenever the factors support this

Question 6

How to engage in the other party’s proposal for track allocation

Answer 6

If submissions are in opposition (proposing a different track), consider whether the other side’s proposals are reasonable and proportionate (in accordance with overriding objective)

• E.g., critique if there is unnecessary calling of expert evidence, which causes unnecessary costs

Question 7

Other factors for track allocation under CPR

Answer 7

Structure: take court through other factors and argue in relation to the proposed track

a) financial value
b) nature of remedy
c) likely complexity
d) number of parties
e) value of any counterclaim
f) amount of oral evidence
g) importance of claims to persons not part of proceedings
h) views of parties
i) circumstances of parties