The court considered appropriate directions where the pleadings presented by the parties had flouted the pleadings rules set out in the Commercial Court practice guide and exceeded by a considerable way, the maximum length. The claim in esence was that the defendant had conspired to induce the Serious Fraud Office (the SFO) to investigate the claimants on a false basis by the unlawful means of making statements to the SFO which the defendants did not believe to be true.
Held: ‘unless adverse costs orders are made in cases of flagrant non-compliance, practitioners who are well aware of the principles of pleading and the provisions of the Commercial Court Guide will continue to overlook them, as happened here. In my view, the appropriate order in this case, and the order which I will make, is that the particulars of claim are struck out, the costs of drafting the particulars of claim are disallowed, and fresh particulars of claim no longer than 45 pages and otherwise complying with Appendix 4 of the Commercial Court Guide should be served within 21 days.’
Leggatt J
[2015] EWHC 405 (Comm)
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Standard Bank Plc v Via Mat International Ltd and Another CA 3-May-2013
Aikens LJ said: ‘Overlong pleadings and written submissions . . which are manufactured by parties and their lawyers have become the bane of commercial litigation in England and Wales.’ . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Litigation Practice
Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.543101