Formative MCQ Flashcards
A motorcyclist was involved in a road traffic accident on 5 May 2018 caused by a driver not exercising the care required. The parties exchanged names and contact details on the scene. The motorcyclist immediately suffered headaches and sickness but did not seek medical attention for these until 12 July 2018, by which time these symptoms had persisted for more than two months.
What is the latest date the motorcyclist can bring a claim for damages for personal injuries against the driver?
A. 5 May 2019
B. 5 May 2024
C. 12 July 2021
D. 12 July 2024
E. 5 May 2021
E. 5 May 2021
This question tested your knowledge of, and ability to apply, the key provisions on limitation (Limitation Act 1980), in particular in relation to a tortious personal injury claim. This was covered in the element ‘Limitation’ in the topic ‘Pre-action considerations and conduct’.
A logistics company claims a debt of £45,000 from a supermarket for delivery services which have not been paid for. The supermarket is defending the entire claim on the basis that payment is not yet due. It also pleads a set-off of £11,000 in a defence and counterclaim, alleging that it has suffered losses in that sum as a result of the deliveries being late, in breach of contract.
If the defendant succeeds in all aspects of its defence and counterclaim, what is the amount of the judgment?
Select one alternative:
A. Claimant pays the defendant £11,000 and the defendant pays the claimant £34,000.
B. Defendant pays the claimant £34,000
C. Claimant pays the defendant £56,000.
D. Claimant pays the defendant £11,000.
E. Neither party pays the other.
D. Claimant pays the defendant £11,000.
This question tested your understanding of the effect of a set-off and counterclaim. This was covered in the element ‘Statements of case – counterclaims and other possible statements of case’ in the topic ‘Statements of case’. The claimant claims £45,000. The defendant defends this on the basis that payment is not yet due. You are told that its defence succeeds in full. Therefore this claim fails. The defendant has its own claim for £11,000, for damages for breach of contract. This claim succeeds, so the claimant is ordered to pay the defendant £11,000. So the overall effect is that the claimant must pay the defendant £11,000. The set-off would be relevant if the primary defence (payment is not yet due) did not succeed in full, because then this additional defence might be relied on to reduce the claimant’s claim. But on these facts, it is not relevant.
A technology company has been working in a joint venture with a robotics company developing robots for use in hospitals. The two have developed a disagreement about the future of the joint venture. The robotics company is threatening to enter into a new joint venture with a private hospital, and to disclose confidential information about the robots with that hospital imminently. The technology company alleges that this would be a breach of the joint venture agreement and extremely harmful. It wishes to prevent this disclosure from taking place. It has a very strong claim. It is preparing court proceedings urgently.
For what is it most appropriate for the technology company to apply, to prevent this disclosure?
Select one alternative:
A. A final prohibitory injunction.
B. Summary judgment.
C. Permission to issue proceedings without complying with the practice direction on pre-action conduct.
D. An early (expedited) trial date.
E. An interim prohibitory injunction.
E. An interim prohibitory injunction.
This was covered in the element ‘Interim injunctions’ in the topic ‘Interim remedies’. An interim prohibitory injunction is an order preventing a party from doing a stated act pending determination of the dispute at trial. It is the best application on the facts stated. Summary judgment is likely to take longer, and these facts suggested the utmost urgency. A final prohibitory injunction might be awarded at trial, but that is much too late – the damage will likely be done by then. An early expedited trial date is a good idea, and this might be ordered alongside an interim prohibitory injunction, but even an early trial will be months away, which is too far on these facts. The court’s permission is not required in order to issue proceedings without complying with the practice direction on pre-action conduct – a party simply needs to assess for itself the risks of that course of action. On these facts, it seems entirely justified.
A clothing manufacturer brings a breach of contract claim against a distributor, claiming £45,000. The claim has been provisionally allocated to the multi-track, and a case management conference has been listed to take place in 3 weeks’ time.
What should each party do in relation to disclosure in advance of the case management conference?
Select one alternative:
A. File and serve draft directions and then seek to agree a proposal for disclosure.
B. File and serve a disclosure report including a proposal for disclosure and then seek to agree a proposal for disclosure.
C. Seek to agree a proposal for disclosure before the case management conference, and if a proposal is agreed, should file and serve a disclosure report including a proposal for disclosure.
D. Discuss whether to depart from the usual order which is for standard disclosure, and if so, file directions to that effect.
E. File draft directions at court.
B. File and serve a disclosure report including a proposal for disclosure and then seek to agree a proposal for disclosure.
This question tested your knowledge and understanding of the early case management procedure on the multi-track, in particular in relation to guiding the parties to an appropriate disclosure order at the case management conference. This was covered in the element ‘Early case management on the multi-track’ in the topic ‘Case management’. You may also find the element ‘Sources and types of disclosure obligation’ in the topic ‘Disclosure and inspection’ useful. The procedure to be followed in relation to disclosure in advance of a case management conference on the multi-track (unless the proceedings include a claim for personal injuries) is that the parties need to file a disclosure report not less than 14 days before the case management conference and discuss and seek to agree a proposal in relation to disclosure not less than 7 days before the case management conference (CPR 31.5(3) – (8)).
A retail company wishes to bring a claim against one of its suppliers for breach of contract. The retail company intends to claim £105,000 damages and £5,000 interest. It considers the claim to be straightforward. Limited witness evidence will be required, and there are no issues that require expert evidence.
What is the best advice for the retail company as to which court it should start the claim in?
Select one alternative:
A. The retail company can choose to bring the claim in the High Court or the County Court, but the High Court is more appropriate.
B. The retail company can choose to bring the claim in the High Court or the County Court, but the County Court is more appropriate.
C. The retail company should seek guidance from the High Court as to whether it will accept the claim.
D. The retail company must bring the claim in the High Court.
E. The retail company must bring the claim in the County Court.
B. The retail company can choose to bring the claim in the High Court or the County Court, but the County Court is more appropriate.
This question required you to understand the jurisdiction of the County Court and High Court and how to approach the matter when both courts have jurisdiction. This is covered in the element ‘Where and how to issue the claim’ in the topic ‘Commencing and serving proceedings’.
A driver carelessly hits a pedestrian when mounting the pavement during a manoeuvre. The claimant brings a personal injury claim against the defendant. The defendant knows he was at fault and does not wish to dispute this but is surprised by the extent of the injuries allegedly suffered by the claimant and is not convinced that they are as extensive as alleged.
How should the defendant respond to the paragraph of the particulars of claim which states the extent of the claimant’s injuries caused by the defendant’s negligence?
Select one alternative:
A. Deny the extent of the injuries allegedly caused by the defendant’s negligence and state that the injuries are inconsistent with the accident caused by the defendant.
B. Require proof of the extent of the injuries allegedly caused by the defendant’s negligence and state that the injuries are inconsistent with the accident caused by the defendant.
C. Require proof of the extent of the injuries allegedly caused by the defendant’s negligence.
D. Deny the extent of the injuries allegedly caused by the defendant’s negligence.
E. Admit the extent of the injuries caused by the defendant’s negligence.
C. Require proof of the extent of the injuries allegedly caused by the defendant’s negligence.
This question tested your understanding of how to draft a defence. This was covered in the element ‘Defences’ in the topic ‘Statements of case’.
Feedback on Deny the extent of the injuries allegedly caused by the defendant’s negligence and state that the injuries are inconsistent with the accident caused by the defendant.
Incorrect. It would be wrong to deny the extent of the injuries as the facts are not within the defendant’s knowledge.
Feedback on Require proof of the extent of the injuries allegedly caused by the defendant’s negligence and state that the injuries are inconsistent with the accident caused by the defendant.
Incorrect. When requiring proof, it is not necessary (and rarely appropriate) to give reasons / an alternative version of events.
Feedback on Require proof of the extent of the injuries allegedly caused by the defendant’s negligence.
Correct. It is appropriate to require proof of this paragraph because the defendant is unable to admit or deny the allegation. The driver has insufficient information to do. When requiring proof, it is not necessary (and rarely appropriate) to give reasons / an alternative version of events. It would be wrong to deny the extent of the injuries as the facts are not within the defendant’s knowledge. It would be wrong to admit the allegations because the defendant does not know them to be true and it would be harmful to the defendant’s case.
Feedback on Deny the extent of the injuries allegedly caused by the defendant’s negligence.
Incorrect. It would be wrong to deny the extent of the injuries as the facts are not within the defendant’s knowledge. If you did want to deny the allegation, reasons would need to be given.
Feedback on Admit the extent of the injuries caused by the defendant’s negligence.
Incorrect. It would be wrong to admit the allegations because the defendant does not know them to be true and it would be harmful to the defendant’s case.
A technology firm entered into a contract with Supplier A under which Supplier A agreed to deliver a consignment of computer chips on 22 April 2020. In breach of contract Supplier A did not deliver the computer chips. On 29 April 2020 the technology firm entered into a contract with Supplier B to provide similar computer chips at twice the price agreed with Supplier A. The technology firm intends to bring a claim against Supplier A for breach of contract.
What is the latest date the technology firm can bring the claim against Supplier A for breach of contract?
Select one alternative:
A. 28 April 2023
B. 22 April 2026
C. 21 April 2026
D. 29 April 2026
E. 22 April 2023
B. 22 April 2026
This question tested your knowledge of, and ability to apply, the key provisions on limitation (Limitation Act 1980), in particular in relation to a contractual claim. This was covered in the element ‘Limitation’ in the topic ‘Pre-action considerations and conduct’.
Unanswered
Feedback on 28 April 2023
Incorrect. In contract claims, the limitation period is 6 years from the date of the breach of contract and you may not have understood when time begins to run. Revisit your materials in relation to limitation.
Answered and correct
Feedback on 22 April 2026
Correct. In contract claims, the limitation period is 6 years from the date of the breach of contract, which in this case was the date the consignment of computer chips should have been delivered (22 April). Time starts running for limitation purposes from the day after the breach, hence the deadline is 22 April 2026 and not 21 April 2026.
Unanswered
Feedback on 21 April 2026
Incorrect. You are correct that in contract claims, the limitation period is 6 years from the date of the breach of contract. However, look back at your materials to see when the time starts running from for limitation purposes so you can calculate the deadline accurately. Revisit your materials in relation to limitation.
Unanswered
Feedback on 29 April 2026
Incorrect. You are correct that in contract claims, the limitation period is 6 years from the date of the breach of contract. Look again at the facts to identify when the breach occurred. Revisit your materials in relation to limitation.
Unanswered
Feedback on 22 April 2023
Incorrect. In contract claims, the limitation period is 6 years from the date of the breach of contract. Revisit your materials in relation to limitation.
A passenger in a road traffic accident commences proceedings in the County Court against the driver seeking damages to be assessed. The claim form indicates that the claimant expects to recover in excess of £25,000. The claim form and particulars of claim are served on the defendant. The defendant admits the whole of the claim but does not offer a sum in satisfaction of the claim.
What should happen next following the defendant’s admission?
Select one alternative:
A. There is no need for the claimant to take action in relation to the admission. The court will automatically arrange a hearing to consider judgment on liability and quantum.
B. The claimant should make a request for judgment. The court will then enter judgment on liability with quantum to be decided at a hearing.
C. The claimant should make a request for judgment. The court will then arrange a hearing to determine liability and quantum.
D. There is no need for the claimant to take action in relation to the admission. The court will automatically enter judgment on liability with quantum to be decided at a later hearing.
E. There is no need for the claimant to take action in relation to the admission. The court will automatically enter judgment on liability and quantum.
B. The claimant should make a request for judgment. The court will then enter judgment on liability with quantum to be decided at a hearing.
This question tested your knowledge and understanding of the procedure when an unspecified claim is admitted in full (CPR 14.2). This is covered in the element ‘Admitting the claim’ in the topic ‘Responding to proceedings’. Where an unspecified claim is admitted and the defendant does not offer a sum of money in satisfaction of the claim, the claimant may request judgment by filing a request in the relevant practice form (this is not automatic) and that judgment (ie on liability) will be for an amount to be decided by the court and costs.
A software company wishes to defend proceedings brought by a customer in negligence. It filed an acknowledgment of service and then also agreed an extension of 21 days for filing and serving the defence. It needs a further 14 days in order to finalise the defence.
What is the most appropriate next step for the software company to take?
Select one alternative:
A. Write to the building company seeking its approval to a further 14-day extension of time and then, assuming approval is given, notify the court of the extension.
B. Make an application to the court for a further 14-day extension of time (and ask the claimant to consent to that application).
C. File its defence within the time period originally agreed (because it is not possible to obtain a further 14-day extension of time) and apply to amend it later if necessary.
D. File and serve the draft defence within the time period originally agreed (because it is not possible to obtain a further 14-day extension of time), and file and serve the final defence as soon as possible after that.
E. File its defence when it has completed it and, if this is outside the time period required by the CPR, make an application to the court for relief from sanctions.
B. Make an application to the court for a further 14-day extension of time (and ask the claimant to consent to that application).
This question tested your understanding of the power of the parties to agree extensions of time for filing and serving a defence, and the court’s power to grant such extensions. This was covered in the element ‘Acknowledging and defending the claim’ in the topic ‘Responding to proceedings’. The parties can agree an extension of time for filing and serving the defence of 28 days, but beyond this, an application to court is required, even if the parties agree. The period required in this case is 35 days, so an application is required. Assuming that approach is followed, there is no need to file and serve a defence in haste (which is likely to require later amendment) nor to apply for relief from sanctions. Apart from it being unwise to file and serve a draft of any document (in case it reveals something that is later regretted), serving a draft and then a revised document later is not permitted.
The claimant in a personal injury claim files an application for summary judgment and is given a hearing date of Thursday 28 November for that application.
Assuming that the claimant is responsible for giving the defendant notice of that hearing, what is the latest day by which the claimant must give that notice?
Select one alternative:
A. Wednesday 13 November
B. Friday 22 November
C. Thursday 14 November
D. Wednesday 20 November
E. Monday 25 November
A. Wednesday 13 November
This question tested your knowledge of the procedural requirements for an application for summary judgment. This was covered in the element ‘Summary judgment’ in the topic ‘Early disposal’. It also required you to understand how to ‘count time’ (CPR 2.8), and this was covered in the element ‘Acknowledging and defending the claim’ in the topic ‘Responding to proceedings’. Where a summary judgment hearing is fixed, the respondent (or the parties where the hearing is fixed of the court’s own initiative) must be given at least 14 days’ notice of (a) the date fixed for the hearing; and (b) the issues which it is proposed that the court will decide at the hearing (CPR 24.4(3)). When counting a period of time which ends on a hearing, the day of the hearing is excluded from the count, as is the day you start counting at the start of the period, so 14 days takes you to Wednesday 13 November.
You are instructed by the claimant company, a supplier of goods to nightclubs, which has brought proceedings to recover the sum of £45,000 from a nightclub operator. The claimant has reviewed the nightclub operator’s annual accounts which show that the nightclub operator has sustained a loss in each of the last three trading years and has almost no assets. The nightclub operator is defending the claim and the claimant is concerned that the nightclub operator will be unable to pay the claimant’s costs if ordered to do so.
What is the best advice to give to the claimant in relation to trying to improve its position in relation to costs recovery?
Select one alternative:
A. The claimant should not apply for security for costs because the nightclub operator’s annual accounts are not relevant in assessing the nightclub operator’s financial position.
B. The claimant should not apply for security for costs because there is no basis for such an application.
C. The claimant should apply for security for costs because this will bring the proceedings to a quicker conclusion.
D. The claimant should apply for security for costs because this will provide a sum of money (or other security) which will later be available to satisfy a costs order.
E. The claimant should apply for security for costs because this will stop the defendant from dissipating any remaining assets.
B. The claimant should not apply for security for costs because there is no basis for such an application.
This question tested your understanding of when security for costs can be obtained and the effect of an order for security for costs. This was covered in the element ‘Security for costs’ in the topic ‘Interim remedies’. In proceedings such as these, without any counterclaim, there is no basis for a claimant seeking security for costs from a defendant. Only the defendant can seek security (from the claimant). So there is no basis for an application on these facts. In circumstances when security for costs is obtained, it provides a sum of money (or other security) which will later be available to satisfy a costs order. It does not necessarily stop the defendant dissipating any remaining assets nor bring the proceedings to a quick conclusion (although it could, indirectly, have either or both of those effects). Annual accounts are usually highly relevant in assessing a party’s financial position
On Monday 1 February, the Claimant issued a Claim Form in the High Court against the Defendant claiming £24,000 in damages. The Claim Form was served by first class post on the Defendant, being posted on Tuesday 2 February. Particulars of claim have not yet been prepared. Today’s date is Wednesday 17 February. The Defendant has not acknowledged service nor entered a Defence.
Can the Claimant obtain judgment in default?
Select one alternative:
A. No, because the time period for responding has not yet started to run.
B. Yes, because the time period for responding elapsed 1 day ago.
C. No, because the time period for responding will not elapse until tomorrow.
D. Yes, because the time period for responding elapsed 2 day ago.
E. No, because the time period for responding will elapse at the end of today.
A. No, because the time period for responding has not yet started to run.
This question required you to understand what document the defendant must respond to in the proceedings. This was covered in the element ‘Introduction to responding to proceedings’. It also required you to know what default judgment is. This was covered in the element on ‘Default judgment’.
Feedback on No, because the time period for responding has not yet started to run.
Correct. The Defendant does not need to respond to proceedings until particulars of claim are served (CPR 9.1) so judgment in default is not possible (CPR 12).
Feedback on Yes, because the time period for responding elapsed 1 day ago.
Incorrect, please check your materials regarding Judgment in Default (CPR 12) as well as your element ‘Introduction to responding to proceedings’.
Feedback on No, because the time period for responding will not elapse until tomorrow.
Incorrect, please check your materials regarding Judgment in Default (CPR 12) as well as your element ‘Introduction to responding to proceedings’.
Feedback on Yes, because the time period for responding elapsed 2 day ago.
Incorrect, please check your materials regarding Judgment in Default (CPR 12) as well as your element ‘Introduction to responding to proceedings’.
Feedback on No, because the time period for responding will elapse at the end of today.
Incorrect, please check your materials regarding Judgment in Default (CPR 12) as well as your element ‘Introduction to responding to proceedings’.
Your client is the claimant in a breach of contract action. They want to make an immediate application to the master for summary judgment against the defendant. Service of the acknowledgment of service has just taken place, indicating that the defendant intends to defend the claim.
What is the most likely costs order which the master will make if the client’s application fails at a hearing of an application for summary judgment?
Select one alternative:
A. A wasted costs order.
B. Costs of the application to the defendant, in any event.
C. Defendant’s costs in the case.
D. No order as to costs.
E. Costs of the application to the claimant, in any event.
B. Costs of the application to the defendant, in any event.
This question was about the likely costs order following an unsuccessful application for Summary Judgment. This was covered in the element ‘Overview of costs’ in the topic ‘Costs’.
Feedback on A wasted costs order.
Incorrect. Wasted costs orders are made only where the party’s legal representative is held personally liable for costs by the court. Please review your materials on cost orders and ensure that you know and understand the relevant principles and rules that will apply in this situation.
Feedback on Costs of the application to the defendant, in any event.
Correct. This means the claimant will have to pay the costs of the unsuccessful application to the defendant. This would be the ‘usual rule’ given that the application has been unsuccessful (CPR 44.2 and 44 PD 4.2), and is especially likely given that the application was made before the defence was filed.
Feedback on Defendant’s costs in the case.
Incorrect. The effect of this order would be that if the defendant is awarded costs at the end the proceedings, it would be entitled to its costs of the application but if the claimant is awarded costs at the end of the proceedings, the claimant would not be entitled to its costs of the application. This is a less likely order than the correct answer. Please review your materials on cost orders and ensure that you know and understand the relevant principles and rules that will apply in this situation.
Feedback on No order as to costs.
Incorrect. It is likely a costs order would be made. Please review your materials on cost orders and ensure that you know and understand the relevant principles and rules that will apply in this situation.
Feedback on Costs of the application to the claimant, in any event.
Incorrect. The claimant will not get the costs of the application if their application is dismissed (CPR 44.2 and 44 PD 4.2). Please review your materials on cost orders and ensure that you know and understand the relevant principles and rules that will apply in this situation.
A homeowner has issued and served the claim form and particulars of claim in relation to defective building works carried out 2 months ago at the homeowner’s home. The two defendants are a plumber and an electrician, and each is alleged to have negligently contributed to the defects. The claimant wishes to amend the particulars of claim to correct small errors in the way the defective electrical works are described.
From whom does the homeowner require permission or consent to make this amendment?
Select one alternative:
A. From the court, the electrician and the plumber.
B. From the court or the electrian and plumber
C. From either the court or the electrician.
D. From the court.
E. From the electrician and the plumber.
B. From the court or the electrian and plumber
This question tested your understanding of amendments to statements of case (CPR 17), in particular where there are no changes to parties or causes of action, and no limitation issues. This was covered in the element ‘Amending statements of case and changing parties’ in the topic ‘Statements of case’. If his statement of case has been served, a party may amend it only – (a) with the written consent of all the other parties; or (b) with the permission of the court (CPR 17.1(2)). The proposed amendment is to the particulars of claim, and these have already been served. Accordingly, either the written consent of all parties, or the permission of the court, is required – but not both. Note the reference to ALL parties (ie plumber and electrician), not just the party who seems to be affected by the amendments.
The claimant in a £2,500,000 damages claim was due to file and exchange its costs budget (Precedent H) by 4.30pm on Monday 15 June. Solicitors for the claimant served and filed this on Tuesday 16 June at 1.30pm. The reason for the delay was that the claimant’s original expert witness became incapacitated, necessitating the claimant finding a last minute suitably qualified replacement.
Solicitors for the defendant have indicated that they do not consent to the late service and filing of the claimant’s precedent H and will expect the usual sanction to apply.
What advice should you give to the claimant about any application required in relation to its budget?
Select one alternative:
A. The appropriate application is for relief against sanction. This application is likely to be successful.
B. The appropriate application is for an extension of time for exchange and filing of the Precedent H. This application is likely to be successful.
C. The appropriate application is for relief against sanction. This application is unlikely to be successful.
D. No application by the claimant is required. The claimant should wait for the defendant to make an application to court for an order that the sanction will be applied, and oppose that application.
E. The appropriate application is for an extension of time for exchange and filing of the Precedent H. This application is likely to be unsuccessful.
A. The appropriate application is for relief against sanction. This application is likely to be successful.
This question is about applying for relief from sanction having missed a deadline for filing. This was covered in the element ‘Costs management – further detail’ in the topic ‘Costs management’, and in the element ‘Case management powers, sanctions and relief’ in the topic ‘Case management’. Unless otherwise ordered by the court, in this situation the usual sanction will apply (CPR 3.14). The effect of this is severe (no costs allowed for the claimant), so the claimant certainly needs to try to avoid this happening by making an application for relief. As the breach is not serious (a matter of hours late) or significant (no hearing date will be put at risk and the subsequent budget discussions and report (Precedent R) will be able take place as planned), under case law (the Denton principles), the relief should be granted at the first stage of the test derived from this judgment. Should the court not accept this at the first stage and move on to the remaining stages of the test (Denton), the reason for the delay is a good one, the value of the claim is significant and the disruption to the litigation minimal, so the court should still grant relief. The automatic sanction means that simply applying for an extension of time is not appropriate.
A steel worker has issued and served proceedings against their employer alleging negligence. The steel worker is claiming £65,000 in relation to personal injuries. The employer denies entirely that it was negligent. The dispute is finely balanced. The claim is at the case management stage. The claimant needs a different car to be able to maintain mobility in light of their injuries but cannot afford to change cars. The cost of making the change would be much less than £65,000.
Does an application for an interim payment by the claimant have good prospects of success?
Select one alternative:
A. No, because although the necessary conditions for the court to order an interim payment are made out, the court is unlikely to exercise its discretion in favour of ordering this because the claim is too low in value.
B. No, because although the necessary conditions for the court to order an interim payment are made out, the court is unlikely to exercise its discretion in favour of ordering this because the application has been made too late.
C. Yes, because the necessary conditions for the court to order an interim payment are made out and therefore the claimant is entitled to an interim payment.
D. Yes, because the necessary conditions for the court to order an interim payment are made out and the court is likely to exercise its discretion in favour of ordering this.
E. No, because the necessary conditions for the court to order an interim payment are not made out
E. No, because the necessary conditions for the court to order an interim payment are not made out
This question tested your knowledge and understanding of the conditions that need to be satisfied before the court has a discretion to order an interim payment (CPR 25.7). This was covered in the element ‘Interim payments’, in the topic ‘Interim remedies’. If one of several conditions is satisfied, then the court has a discretion to order an interim payment. None of the conditions apply on these facts, and therefore the court has no option to order an interim payment. The court would have a discretion to order an interim payment only if one of these conditions was satisfied. The timing of the application would not be fatal if one of the necessary conditions was satisfied, although it would be a relevant consideration. The claim is not too low value for an interim payment.
A claimant has made a claim for £20,000 against a defendant company in relation to a breach of contract. The court expects the trial to take 2 days. Expert evidence will be required from one expert on behalf of each party.
What is the normal track for this claim, the fast track or the multi-track?
Select one alternative:
A. The fast track, because of the expert evidence required.
B. The multi-track, because of the estimated length of trial.
C. The fast track, because of the value of the claim.
D. The multi-track, because of the value of the claim.
E. The multi-track, because of the expert of the evidence required.
B. The multi-track, because of the estimated length of trial.
This question required you to understand the considerations in determining the ‘normal’ track for a claim, and not limit your analysis to just the ‘value’ of the claim. This was covered in the element ‘Allocation to track’ in the topic ‘Case management’.
Feedback on The fast track, because of the expert evidence required.
Incorrect. From the point of view of expert evidence, this claim is suitable for the fast-track, but expert evidence is not the only relevant consideration. Revisit your materials on allocation (CPR 26.6).
Feedback on The multi-track, because of the estimated length of trial.
Correct. The fast track is suitable for claims (outside of the small claims track) with a value of £25,000 or less, but only if the requirements for length of trial and expert evidence are also limited as provided for in the rules (CPR 26.6(5)) in particular the trial is likely to last for no longer than one day. The trial in this case is likely to last 2 days, and therefore the fast track is not the normal track, and the multi-track is the normal track instead.
Feedback on The fast track, because of the value of the claim.
Incorrect. From the point of view of value, this claim is suitable for the fast-track, but value is not the only relevant consideration. Revisit your materials on allocation (CPR 26.6).
Feedback on The multi-track, because of the value of the claim.
Incorrect. The fact that the value is £20,000 does not mean that the multi-track is the normal track – considering value alone, the fast-track is the normal track (but the value is not the only relevant consideration). Revisit your materials on allocation (CPR 26.6).
Feedback on The multi-track, because of the expert of the evidence required.
Incorrect. The fact that expert evidence will be required from one expert on behalf of each party does not mean that the multi-track is the normal track. Revisit your materials on allocation (CPR 26.6).
A software company wishes to bring a simple breach of contract claim against one of its main suppliers. It has just sent a letter to the proposed defendant detailing the basis upon which the claim is made, a summary of the facts and what it is looking for in terms of remedy. It also sets out how this figure is calculated.
Which of the following statements best describes what the defendant should do next?
Select one alternative:
A. The proposed defendant does not need to respond to the letter because it has not received sufficient details in relation to the claim.
B. The proposed defendant should respond to the letter within a reasonable time which is likely to be around 14 days.
C. The proposed defendant does not need to respond to the letter because proceedings have not yet been issued.
D. The proposed defendant does not need to respond to the letter because there is no specific pre-action protocol covering the subject of the claim.
E. The proposed defendant should respond to the letter within a reasonable time which is likely to be around three months.
B. The proposed defendant should respond to the letter within a reasonable time which is likely to be around 14 days.
Feedback
This question required an understanding of the existence, purpose and provisions of the Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct. This was covered in the element ‘Pre action conduct’ in the topic ‘Pre-action considerations and conduct’.
Feedback on The proposed defendant does not need to respond to the letter because it has not received sufficient details in relation to the claim.
This answer is incorrect. Please review your materials relating to pre-action conduct and in particular the Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct. You need to be able to recognise the steps that both parties should take prior to the commencement of proceedings where there is no specific pre-action protocol in place.
Feedback on The proposed defendant should respond to the letter within a reasonable time which is likely to be around 14 days.
Correct. Where there is no relevant pre-action protocol the parties should exchange correspondence and information to comply with the objectives in the Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct. Such steps will usually include a defendant responding to the initial letter of claim within a reasonable time – 14 days in a straightforward case as here and no more than three months in a very complex one.
Feedback on The proposed defendant does not need to respond to the letter because proceedings have not yet been issued.
This answer is incorrect. Please review your materials relating to pre-action conduct and in particular the Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct. You need to be able to recognise the steps that both parties should take prior to the commencement of proceedings where there is no specific pre-action protocol in place.
Feedback on The proposed defendant does not need to respond to the letter because there is no specific pre-action protocol covering the subject of the claim.
This answer is incorrect. Please review your materials relating to pre-action conduct and in particular the Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct. You need to be able to recognise the steps that both parties should take prior to the commencement of proceedings where there is no specific pre-action protocol in place.
Feedback on The proposed defendant should respond to the letter within a reasonable time which is likely to be around three months.
This answer is incorrect. Please review your materials relating to pre-action conduct and in particular the Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct. You need to be able to recognise the steps that both parties should take prior to the commencement of proceedings where there is no specific pre-action protocol in place.
A pedestrian is involved in an accident with a motorist and a cyclist. The pedestrian commences proceedings against the motorist, and serves the claim form and particulars of claim on the motorist. On considering the motorist’s defence, the pedestrian wishes to add the cyclist as an additional defendant to the proceedings.
Does the pedestrian require permission or consent from the court or another party to add the cyclist as a defendant?
Select one alternative:
A. Permission / consent is not required from the court, motorist or cyclist.
B. Permission / consent from either the court or the cyclist is sufficient.
C. Permission / consent is needed from the court.
D. Permission / consent is needed from the cyclist.
E. Permission / consent from either the court or the motorist is sufficient
C. Permission / consent is needed from the court.
This question tested your understanding of the procedural requirements when a claimant seeks to add a party. This was covered in the element ‘Amending statements of case and changing parties’ in the topic ‘Statements of case’. The court’s permission is required to remove, add or substitute a party, unless the claim form has not been served (CPR 19.4(1)). The claim form has been served in this case, and therefore the court’s permission is required. Whilst obtaining the motorist and/or cyclist’s consent to that application will give the application better prospects of success, their consent is neither necessary nor sufficient to add the party.
A defendant to a personal injury claim considers that certain paragraphs of the particulars of claim are impossible to understand. The paragraphs concerned explain adaptations allegedly required to the claimant’s house as a result of the claimant’s injuries, the costs of which are being claimed in the proceedings. The explanations are in very technical language and full of abbreviations. The defendant has not yet filed a defence.
What action, if any, should the defendant take in relation to these paragraphs / the issues raised in these paragraphs specifically?
Select one alternative:
A. Request disclosure in relation to the adaptations when the proceedings reach the disclosure stage (and apply to court at that stage, if necessary).
B. Serve a request for further information (and apply to court for this if necessary).
C. Request disclosure of documents evidencing the adaptations now (and apply to court for this if necessary).
D. Apply for strike out (unless the claimant will concede this).
E. Apply for summary judgment (unless the claimant will concede this).
B. Serve a request for further information (and apply to court for this if necessary).
This question required you to understand requests for further information (CPR 18) and to understand the limitations of applying for strike out of proceedings, summary judgment or disclosure. This was covered primarily in the element ‘Requests for further information’ in the topic ‘Statements of case’.
Feedback on Request disclosure in relation to the adaptations when the proceedings reach the disclosure stage (and apply to court at that stage, if necessary).
Waiting until the disclosure stage in the proceedings is too late to achieve the understanding which the defendant seeks. Revisit your materials in relation to statements of case.
Feedback on Serve a request for further information (and apply to court for this if necessary).
Correct. The court has power to order a party to clarify any matter in dispute or provide additional information in relation to any such matter (CPR 18). The defendant will not be able to prepare its defence without understanding the particulars. A request for further information is the best way to arrive at a position of understanding –receiving disclosure now is not necessary to achieve this end and is likely to be disproportionately costly. Waiting until the disclosure stage in the proceedings is too late. Applying for summary judgment or strike out could be considered if the claimant is unable or unwilling to clarify its statement of case, but should not be the starting point, because again, they are disproportionate mechanisms.
Feedback on Request disclosure of documents evidencing the adaptations now (and apply to court for this if necessary).
Incorrect. Receiving disclosure now is not necessary to achieve the understanding which the defendant seeks and is likely to be disproportionately costly. Revisit your materials in relation to statements of case.
Feedback on Apply for strike out (unless the claimant will concede this).
Incorrect. Applying for strike out could be considered at a later stage, but should not be the starting point, because it is a disproportionate mechanism to achieve the understanding which the defendant seeks. Revisit your materials in relation to statements of case.
Feedback on Apply for summary judgment (unless the claimant will concede this).
Incorrect. Applying for summary judgment could be considered at a later stage, but should not be the starting point, because it is a disproportionate mechanism to achieve the understanding which the defendant seeks. Revisit your materials in relation to statements of case.
1
In a civil dispute, a claimant makes a Part 36 offer in the sum of £90,000 to the defendant 3 months before trial. The defendant replies the same week with a Part 36 offer to pay £45,000. Neither party accepts the other party’s offer. At trial, the claimant obtains a judgment against the defendant for £70,000.
What is the court most likely to order in relation to costs?
Select one alternative:
The defendant to pay the claimant’s costs of the claim.
The claimant to pay the defendant’s costs of the claim.
The defendant will pay the claimant’s costs until the expiry of the relevant period of the claimant’s offer, and the claimant will pay the defendant’s costs after this point.
The claimant will pay the defendant’s costs until the expiry of the relevant period of the defendant’s offer, and the defendant will pay the claimant’s costs after this point.
The defendant will pay the claimant’s costs until the expiry of the relevant period of the defendant’s offer, and the defendant will pay the claimant’s costs with interest after this point.
The defendant to pay the claimant’s costs of the claim.
Part 36 has no consequences in these circumstances – in the broadest of terms, neither party has done the same as, or better than, it offered (CPR 36.17). Accordingly the general rule in relation to costs applies – the unsuccessful party should pay the costs of the successful party (CPR 44.2). The claimant is the successful party – it received a substantial award at trial.
A catering company has issued proceedings alleging professional negligence on the part of the catering company’s accountants. The proceedings have been allocated to the multitrack. In their defence, the accountants deny negligence, and raise arguments in relation to the technicalities of accounting which had not been anticipated by the catering company. The catering company wishes to instruct an expert accountant to provide a view on the strength of the defendant accountants’ arguments (the ‘Intended Instructions’), in order that the catering company can decide how to proceed.
Which of the following is the best advice to give to the client as to its liberty to instruct an expert in this way?
Select one alternative:
The court’s permission is not required for the Intended Instructions if the parties agree on an expert, otherwise it is required.
The court’s permission is required for the Intended Instructions.
The court’s permission is not required for the Intended Instructions if the catering company is prepared to disclose the expert’s advice.
The court’s permission is not required for the Intended Instructions.
The claim is allocated to the multi-track and this constitutes the court’s permission for the Intended Instructions.
The court’s permission is not required for the Intended Instructions.
A common misconception is that the court’s permission is required to instruct an expert witness whereas, in fact, a party may instruct as many experts as it likes. For this reason, the court’s permission is not needed for the Intended Instructions. The court’s permission is needed, however, to call an expert or rely upon a written expert’s report at trial (CPR 35.4(1)).
A claimant company has made a without notice application for an interim prohibitory injunction to prevent a former employee from disclosing confidential information in breach of her employment contract. The claimant’s solicitors are aware of a reported case which is likely to have a material and unhelpful effect on the outcome of the claimant’s application.
Should the claimant’s legal representative draw the court’s attention to the unhelpful case?
Select one alternative:
Yes, because the application is for an injunction.
No, because the defendant can draw the court’s attention to the case at a future hearing.
Yes, because the representative is obliged to draw the court’s attention to relevant cases.
Yes, because the application is made without notice.
No, because it is not in the claimant’s best interests to do so.
Yes, because the representative is obliged to draw the court’s attention to relevant cases.
Pursuant to Rule 2.7 of the Code of Conduct, a solicitor must draw the court’s attention to relevant cases which are likely to have a material effect on the outcome of the proceedings. This applies even though this might not be in the client’s best interests. Accordingly, the claimant’s legal representative must draw the court’s attention to the unhelpful case. This is true whether or not an application is without notice and whether or not it relates to an injunction, albeit in practice compliance with this duty may require more careful attention in the case of an application without notice for an injunction than in relation to many other types of application. It cannot simply be left to the defendant to draw the relevant case to the court’s attention.
An English company based in London supplies noise insulation services to restaurants. It has a dispute regarding non-payment of an invoice sent to a sole trader who is an individual domiciled in Italy. The invoice relates to services supplied in relation to a restaurant in Manchester. The written contract between the English company and the individual has an exclusive jurisdiction clause stipulating that all disputes must be heard in the courts of Italy.
In which courts must the dispute be heard?
Select one alternative:
English courts, because of the domicile of the English company.
English courts, because the matter concerns land in England.
Italian courts, because of the domicile of the individual.
Either the English or Italian courts.
Italian courts, because of the exclusive jurisdiction clause.
Italian courts, because of the exclusive jurisdiction clause.
This is a clause relating to a civil / commercial matter, in a written contract, granting jurisdiction exclusively to a state contracted to the Hague Convention. The dispute is not of a type excluded from the Hague Convention. Accordingly, the exclusive jurisdiction clause is effective, and proceedings must be brought in Italy. In these circumstances, the fact that the defendant is domiciled in Italy is not really relevant.
