Introduction to Civil Litigation

1.1 The Woolf and Jackson Reforms

Fundamental Changes: The nature of civil litigation in England and Wales underwent significant transformation on 26 April 1999, with the implementation of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (CPR 1998) (SI 1998/3132).
Woolf Reforms: These rules were part of the Woolf Reforms, initiated from Lord Woolf's report titled Access to Justice (1996), which aimed to address flaws in the existing litigation system. Key issues included:
- High costs of litigation
- Excessive duration of cases
- Complexity making the system difficult for many litigants to understand
Jackson Reforms: Further reforms came in April 2013, based on a comprehensive review by Lord Justice Jackson, focusing on:
- Enhancing judicial control over litigation costs
- Facilitating alternative funding methods for civil cases

1.1.1 The Overriding Objective

Philosophy: Lord Woolf envisioned a civil justice system that is just in outcomes, fair to litigants, and comprehensible.
Key Principles: Effective procedures must be accessible, timely, and cost-efficient.
Court Control: Control of litigation was shifted from parties to the courts, enabling them to direct case progress, establish timetables, and enforce compliance.
Detail of the Overriding Objective (CPR r 1.1):
1. Rule states the procedural aim of enabling the court to manage cases justly and at proportionate costs.
2. Elements to ensure just procedures include:
  - Equal footing for parties
  - Minimizing expenses
  - Proportional dealings depending on money involved, case importance, complexity, and financial positions of parties
  - Ensuring expeditious and fair treatment
  - Appropriate allocation of court resources
  - Promoting alternative dispute resolution (ADR)
  - Ensuring compliance with procedural rules
Case Reference:
- In Maltez v Lewis (1999), the court affirmed a citizen's right to choose their legal representation and highlighted the need for a level playing field between parties despite differences in legal representation quality.
- Lord Woolf suggested conditions for procedures under which, if one side cannot afford the costs, the opposing side should shoulder the financial burden.

1.1.2 Parties’ Duty to Further Overriding Objective

1.1.2.1 Duty to the Court

Civic Responsibility: Lawyers and clients must actively work to support the overriding objective per rule 1.3. Cooperation and realistic engagement are required in dealings with court and opposing parties (supported by Buchanan v Stennett [2022]).
Duty to Opponents: Clarified through Woodward v Phoenix Healthcare Distribution Ltd [2018], where it was argued that no party has a duty to reveal the opponent's errors unless required by CPR 1.3.

1.1.2.2 Example of Duty Application

Hannigan v Hannigan [2000]: Despite several procedural faults in the claim's initiation, the Court of Appeal refused to strike it out, noting that critical information needed was provided to the defendants despite technical mishaps.
Judicial Expectation: The court should not allow technicalities to obstruct justice and must encourage parties to correct mistakes collaboratively.

1.1.2.3 Professional Conduct

Solicitor’s Duty: A solicitor must prioritize their client's best interests, adhering to professional codes while considering the court's expectations regarding cooperation and realistic engagement in litigation.

1.1.3 Judicial Case Management

Court’s Active Role: Following CPR 1998, the court is mandated to manage cases actively, including:
- Facilitating cooperation between parties
- Early issue identification
- Prompt issue determination
- Encouraging ADR use
- Helping parties settle disputes
- Managing timelines and case progress
- Utilization of technology in proceedings
Law and Practice Guidance: Detailed in Chapter 9.

1.1.4 Participation of Vulnerable Parties or Witnesses

Vulnerability Definition: Vulnerability can be due to personal or situational factors affecting participation in legal processes. Early identification by the court is crucial.
Ground Rules: The court may set 'ground rules' for the evidence from vulnerable witnesses to guarantee fair participation.
Extending Provisions: Commentary from Master Dr. Victoria McCloud emphasizes structured reasoning tools to assess vulnerability.

1.2 The Rules

1.2.1 Scope of CPR 1998

Applicability: CPR 1998 is relevant across County Court, High Court, and Civil Division of the Court of Appeal, excluding specific proceedings such as:
- Insolvency
- Family and adoption matters
- Court of Protection cases
- Non-contentious probate matters
- Election petitions in High Court
Principle Clarification: CPR applies only to procedural conduct, not substantive law interpretation as in Cowan v Foreman [2019].

1.2.2 Practice Directions

Interpretation and Context: Practice Directions (PDs) expand upon Rules and sometimes provide broader content. Regular checking for amendments is essential (guidance from Ministry of Justice).

1.3 An Overview of a Civil Claim

1.3.1 Stage 1: Pre-commencement of Proceedings

1.3.1.1 Client’s Objectives

Identifying Client Needs: Clarify legal or non-legal expectations; assess actionable damages and deadlines for claims.

1.3.1.2 Prospective Parties

Defining Stakeholders: Identify all potential parties for court actions and ensure full involvement to avoid future professional conduct issues.

1.3.1.3 Evidence Collection

Importance of Evidence: Collect relevant evidence immediately to avoid memory loss and document decay.

1.3.1.4 Costs Assessment

Funding Considerations: Determine cost structures early and discuss financial aspects with the client.

1.3.1.5 Limitation and Jurisdiction

Jurisdictional Bounds: Establish deadlines for claims and necessary jurisdiction considerations based on agreements.

1.3.1.6 Dispute Resolution Options

Evaluating Settlement Options: Explore ADR before litigation; weighing merits, costs, and business impacts is crucial.

1.3.1.7 Pre-action Protocols

Steps Before Action: Govern procedures leading to court actions, penalty frameworks for non-compliance include interest cuts.

1.3.2 Stage 2: Commencement of the Claim

Commencement Process: Clients must understand processes, timelines, and implications of filing claims, serving form, and specifics regarding defenses leading to allocations.
Allocation Details: Claims are tracked based on amount and complexity, divided into:
- Small Claims (<£10,000)
- Fast Track (£10,000-£25,000)
- Intermediate Track (£25,000-£100,000)
- Multi-Track (>£100,000)

1.3.3 Stage 3: Interim Matters

Case Management Post Allocation: Follow timelines for document disclosure and evidence submissions.

1.3.4 Stage 4: Trial

Trial Characteristics: Differentiated approaches based on tracking categories; small claims trials are informal, while other tracks observe formal evidentiary rules.

1.3.5 Stage 5: Post-Trial

Appeals and Compliance: Procedures involve appeals decisions, cost determinations, and enforcement methods if judgments are unpaid.

1.4 Case Analysis

1.4.1 Causes of Action

Fundamental Concepts: Identify legal bases of claims, including breach of contract, negligence, etc. Initial fact analysis is critical to case viability.

1.4.2 Example: Breach of Contract

Evaluation Steps: Assess contractual evidence, establish terms, and determine breach circumstances based on available evidence.

1.4.3 Summary of Breach Claim Analysis

Essential Criteria: Establish the contract's existence, terms, breach, factual consequences, and loss through evidence Continuous issue tracking through grid charts is recommended.

1.5 Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs)

Identification of SLAPPs: Awareness of litigation used to intimidate opposing parties over public interest issues. Abusive litigation tactics have specific red flags.

1.6 Useful Websites

Resource Navigation: Key websites include the Ministry of Justice and GOV.UK sites for procedural guidance, forms, and updates.