Court's case management powers

The court's aim is to ensure that cases are dealt with justly and at proportionate cost—in other words, in accordance with the overriding objective in CPR 1. It has wide powers to manage a claim so as to effect furtherance of that objective and CPR 1.4 provides that the court must 'further the overriding objective by actively managing cases'. Active management of cases can include any of the steps set out in CPR 1.4(2)—for more information, see Practice Note: Case management of civil claims under the CPR—Case management and the overriding objective (CPR 1).

Cases are largely managed through the court's case management, including ‘directions’ given by the court which set out the steps the parties are required to take to prepare the case for trial, and the time limits within which each of these steps should be taken. Especially in higher value and more complex claims, the first point at which the parties are likely to be before the court to consider the progress of the matter to date and for the court to give directions going forward,

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest Dispute Resolution News

CPRC proposes amendment to CPR 52.12(3) on appellant's notices

The Civil Procedure Rule Committee (CPRC) has initiated a consultation on proposed amendments to CPR 52.12(3) concerning appellant's notices. The key changes include explicitly requiring a sealed copy of the appellant's notice to be served and extending the time limit for service from 7 to 14 days after filing. The CPRC invites comments on both the principle and wording of the proposed changes until 21 February 2025, after which the matter will be considered for implementation.

Dispute Resolution weekly highlights—9 January 2025

This week's edition of Dispute Resolution weekly highlights includes analysis of a number of key DR developments and key judicial decisions including the Master of the Rolls announcing an update to the Guideline Hourly Rates and the Court of Appeal decision in Alame v Shell Plc (formerly known as Royal Dutch Shell Plc) (class actions and disclosure); dates for your diary; details of our most recently published content; and other information of general interest to dispute resolution practitioners.

High Court assesses damages following termination of licence to use software (THJ Systems v Sheridan)

TMT analysis: The High Court has assessed damages in a case involving the termination of a licence to use software. The case illustrates how the court approaches the task of assessing damages in business disputes of this nature. It emphasises the importance of compliance, credible evidence, and clear differentiation of claims, offering practical lessons for lawyers handling similar cases in England and Wales. Written by Helen Hart, senior knowledge lawyer at Lewis Silkin LLP.

Assessing serious harm and special damages in slander post-Blake (Oliver v Duffy)

TMT analysis: This case involved a slander claim based on a statement made after a heated exchange between two locals at a pub, in which it was alleged the Claimant was a paedophile. Although the single meaning of the statement was considered defamatory at common law, the claim was dismissed on the basis that the claimant could not meet the thresholds for serious harm and special damages. This case explores the elements of slander and libel, and provides timely guidance for claimants seeking to establish, and defendants hoping to defend, a claim in slander following the Court of Appeal and High Court's decisions in Blake v Fox. Written by Joanna Lonergan, trainee in Reputation Protection and Crisis Management at Mishcon de Reya LLP.

View Dispute Resolution by content type :

News