Overview of a Typical Litigation Claim.
Overview of a Typical Litigation Claim (England and Wales, 2025)
Litigation in England and Wales follows a structured, procedural path from the initial dispute through to final judgment. In practice, parties must take certain formal steps before and after a claim is issued to ensure fairness, efficiency and proportionality. This guide outlines the typical stages of a litigation claim under the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR), incorporating the latest procedural reforms and case law as of 2025. The discussion is written in a formal, authoritative tone suitable for professional and client audiences, with citations to rules and guidance.
Pre-Action Stage: Protocols and Early Steps
Before issuing a claim, parties are generally expected to engage in pre-action conduct. Approved Pre-Action Protocols set out the conduct and steps that the courts “would normally expect” parties to take before proceedings for particular types of claims. These protocols (e.g. for personal injury, professional negligence, debt, housing disrepair, etc.) require the Claimant to send a detailed letter of claim explaining the basis of the dispute and providing supporting information. The Defendant must then respond within a specified period (often 3–4 months) with a letter of response addressing the issues and indicating whether the claim is accepted or disputed.
The objectives of pre-action protocols include ensuring that parties have exchanged enough information to understand each other’s positions, attempting to settle issues without court proceedings, and considering alternative dispute resolution (ADR). The Civil Procedure Rules emphasise that only reasonable and proportionate steps should be taken, and that costs incurred before proceedings must be proportionate. In practice, parties often include documents such as contracts, correspondence and expert reports in pre-action correspondence. If no specific protocol applies, the Practice Direction – Pre-Action Conduct still requires parties to exchange correspondence and information to meet these objectives in a proportionate way. Courts may impose cost penalties if a party unreasonably refuses to follow pre-action requirements.
Key points: All relevant pre-action steps should be completed before issuing a claim. This may include settlement negotiations, ADR (mediation, etc.), and complying with any specific pre-action protocol. Failure to follow an applicable protocol can lead to cost sanctions and adverse consequences at trial.
Issuing Proceedings: Claim Form and Particulars
Once pre-action steps are complete (or where no protocol applies), a claim is started by issuing a Claim Form (Form N1) at court. Under CPR 7.2, “proceedings are started when the court issues a claim form at the request of the Claimant”. The claim form is sealed with the date of issue and includes brief details of the claim. Typically, a more detailed Particulars of Claim is filed either with the claim form or within 14 days after issue (CPR 7.4). The particulars set out the facts, legal basis of the claim, and the remedies sought. Claimants must ensure that the claim form and particulars comply with CPR requirements and any relevant Practice Directions (e.g. specifying the cause of action and the remedy claimed).
When issuing the claim, the Claimant must pay the required court issue fee (subject to any fee remission under help-with-fees rules). The Claimant must also choose the correct court in which to issue – for example, a local county court, a specialist list, or the Business and Property Courts (for complex commercial cases). If the claim is a money claim, it can now be issued online via HMCTS’s MyHMCTS service, which as of 2025 accepts claims for any amount. (Previously, the Money Claim Online system only covered claims up to £100,000, and a new Online Money Claims service was introduced for claims under £25,000; as of March 2025 that threshold has been lifted to accept higher-value claims.) MyHMCTS allows claimants (and represented defendants) to manage the claim entirely digitally, following Practice Direction 51R (the Online Civil Money Claims pilot) which is now in full effect. Alternatively, a claim can still be issued on paper by filing the N1 form at court and paying the fee.
Key points: Proceedings begin when the court issues (seals) the claim form. A valid claim form, particulars of claim (or a concise statement of case), and payment of the court fee are required at issue. For money claims, the online MyHMCTS platform is now the norm for issuing and managing claims, though paper filing remains available if needed.
Service of Proceedings
After issue, the Claimant must serve the claim form (and the particulars of claim, if not included) on the Defendant(s) in accordance with CPR Part 6. There are strict time limits: under CPR 7.5(1) the claim form must be served within 4 months of issue if the Defendant is within England and Wales. (Service outside the jurisdiction must generally occur within 6 months, unless extended by the court.) Service can be effected by various permitted methods – personal delivery, first-class post, document exchange (DX), or other methods prescribed by CPR 6.5–6.7 (including electronic service by agreement). In practice, most claims are served by first-class post or by courier (both treated as service on the next business day after posting).
If the Claimant fails to serve the claim form within the time limit, the court may strike out the claim, and an extension of time will only be granted in limited circumstances. CPR 7.6 allows the Claimant to apply for an extension of the service deadline, but this is strictly controlled. After service, the Claimant should file a Certificate of Service at court (CPR 6.17) to prove and record that service has been effected.
Key points: Issue and service are distinct steps. Once issued, the claim form must be properly served on each Defendant (usually by mail or personal service) within 4 months. Failure to effect service in time may lead to dismissal of the claim or require an urgent court application for an extension.
Defendant’s Response: Acknowledgment, Defence and Counterclaim
Upon being served, the Defendant has prescribed time periods to respond. Under CPR Part 10, a Defendant who needs more time to prepare a defence can file an Acknowledgment of Service within 14 days of service. Filing an acknowledgment extends the deadline to submit a defence to 28 days from the date of service. If the Defendant does not acknowledge service, then a defence must be filed within 14 days of service (unless the claim was served via the County Court Business Centre or similar, where slightly different timelines may apply). These deadlines are set out in CPR 10.3–10.5. In practice, the claim form (or accompanying notice) specifies the exact date by which a defence is due.
In the Defence, the Defendant must address each allegation in the particulars of claim and either admit, deny, or require proof of each point (CPR 16.5). The defence should be concise and focus on the key issues in dispute. The Defendant may also raise a counterclaim against the Claimant or additional claims (for example, a contribution claim against a third party) in the same document, provided they follow CPR Part 20. If a counterclaim is filed, the Claimant will need to respond to it in due course (usually by a Defence to Counterclaim).
If a Defendant fails to file a defence within the time limit (i.e. does not file either an acknowledgment or a defence by the deadline), the Claimant may seek judgment in default under CPR Part 12. Default judgment allows the Claimant to obtain a binding judgment without a trial if certain conditions are met. Essentially, if the defence deadline passes without any response, the Claimant can request judgment in default from the court. (There are some exceptions – for example, default judgment is not available for certain claims under the Part 8 procedure, or where the Defendant has applied to strike out the claim.) Once default judgment is entered, the Defendant is typically liable for the claim as stated, though they may apply to set it aside in limited circumstances (CPR 13).
Key points: A Defendant normally has 14 days from service to acknowledge, which gives 28 days from service to file a defence; otherwise the defence is due in 14 days. The defence must respond to each allegation in the claim. If no defence is filed in time, the Claimant can obtain default judgment (CPR 12), meaning the case is effectively won without trial.
Allocation and Case Management
Once the claim is defended, the court allocates the case to one of the available tracks based on the claim’s value and complexity. Under CPR 26.4, the tracks are defined mainly by financial value (and other factors like trial length and expert evidence). As of 2025, there are four tracks for civil claims:
- Small Claims Track: This is the normal track for claims valued up to £10,000 (with a lower threshold of £1,000 for certain personal injury and housing disrepair claims). The procedure is simplified and legal costs are very limited in this track.
- Fast Track: The fast track is the normal track for straightforward claims above £10,000 up to £25,000, provided the case can be tried in one day and with limited oral expert evidence (usually one expert per side in one field). This track has a standardized procedure and timetable.
- Intermediate Track: Introduced in October 2023, the intermediate track is for suitable cases valued between £25,000 and £100,000. To be allocated to this track, the case should be of moderate complexity – generally one that can be tried within 3 days and with no more than two expert witnesses giving oral evidence on each side. The intermediate track captures less complex multi-value claims and provides a structured process (with fixed recoverable costs, as noted below) for these mid-range cases.
- Multi-Track: The multi-track is for highly complex or higher-value cases. Typically, claims exceeding £100,000 or those that require more than 3 days of trial (or extensive evidence) will be allocated to the multi-track. The court has discretion to allocate a case valued under £100,000 to the multi-track if it is particularly complex, to ensure it is managed appropriately.
After a defence is filed and the case is allocated, the court will issue a case management order and directions. Often, the parties are first required to file an Allocation Questionnaire (also known as a Directions Questionnaire) online via MyHMCTS or by paper, providing information about the case (e.g. key issues, proposed witnesses, experts, etc.) and indicating their track preference. A judge will then either hold a Case Management Conference (CMC) (sometimes done by telephone/video or on the papers) to finalise directions, or issue directions by reviewing the file. At the CMC (or through the directions order), the judge will fix a timetable for the key steps in the litigation: e.g. deadlines for disclosure of documents, exchange of witness statements, expert evidence exchange, any preliminary issues, and a trial window or trial date.
For multi-track cases, Costs Budgeting under CPR Part 3 and Practice Direction 3E usually applies – each party must file a detailed budget of their estimated costs, and the court will approve or adjust these budgets to manage costs (a process introduced in 2013 that is now routine). For intermediate track cases, formal costs budgeting is not required, as these cases are subject to fixed recoverable costs rather than budget-based cost management (). In smaller cases on the fast track, the court typically gives standard directions without a CMC: fast-track trials are usually limited to one day, with at most one expert per party, and witness evidence controlled by earlier exchange of written statements.
Key points: The court will allocate a defended claim to the small claims track (up to £10,000), fast track (up to £25,000), intermediate track (up to £100,000 if criteria met), or multi-track (over £100,000 or particularly complex) as appropriate. The parties must complete allocation questionnaires and may attend a case management conference. The judge then issues a timetable of directions for disclosure, evidence, and trial, tailored to the track and needs of the case.
Disclosure and Exchange of Evidence
An essential phase of any defended claim is the disclosure (also called discovery) of documents and the exchange of evidence. Each party is obliged to disclose the documents that they rely on, as well as any documents that adversely affect their own case or support the other side’s case (subject to legal privilege). This duty is set out in CPR Part 31. Since 2020, disclosure procedures have been reformed to be more proportionate: instead of broad “standard disclosure” in every case, courts often require tailored disclosure lists or models. For example, in complex cases in the Business and Property Courts, the Disclosure Pilot scheme (introduced in 2019) has now been incorporated permanently into the rules (as Practice Direction 57AD) to guide a more focused approach to disclosure. In practice, the parties typically exchange lists of documents and then produce copies of the key documents to each other. Documents can include contracts, emails, letters, invoices, expert reports, photographs, and so on. Parties should use common sense in identifying relevant documents and must respect confidentiality and legal privilege (privileged documents, such as lawyer-client communications or without prejudice negotiations, are not disclosable).
Alongside documents, parties exchange witness statements of fact. Each party’s witnesses (for example, the Claimant, Defendant, or other individuals with relevant knowledge) provide written statements setting out the evidence they will give at trial. These witness statements must be truthful and signed with a statement of truth. The court’s case management order will set a deadline for exchanging witness statements, usually a number of weeks after disclosure.
If expert evidence is needed (governed by CPR Part 35), the court’s permission is required. The parties should indicate at the allocation stage if expert evidence will be needed. Typically, for efficiency and cost-saving, one single joint expert (instructed by both parties) may be used in fast track cases. In more substantial cases, each side might have its own expert, but the court will encourage the experts to confer and narrow the issues between them. Expert reports are then exchanged, and each expert must give an independent opinion within their expertise, with a duty to the court above the parties. The court may also direct experts to produce a joint statement highlighting points of agreement and disagreement.
Key points: Each party must give the other parties copies of relevant documents (disclosure) and exchange witness statements well before trial. Disclosure should be proportionate and focused – often guided by court directions or agreements between parties (the broad Disclosure Pilot approach is now part of the rules rather than a temporary pilot). Expert evidence is limited and managed by the court (often one expert per issue), with experts owing a duty to the court to provide an objective opinion.
Settlement and Alternative Dispute Resolution
Throughout the litigation process, parties are encouraged (and often required) to consider settlement and ADR at every stage. Even after court proceedings have started, offers of settlement can be made at any time. One formal mechanism is CPR Part 36: either a Claimant or Defendant may make a Part 36 offer to settle the claim (or specific issues) on certain terms. Part 36 offers carry significant cost consequences – for example, if a Claimant makes an offer that the Defendant rejects but the Claimant then does better than that offer at trial, the Defendant may face penalties in costs and interest from the date the offer could have been accepted. Similarly, if a Defendant makes a Part 36 offer that the Claimant fails to beat at trial, the Claimant may have to pay the Defendant’s costs from the expiration of the offer. These rules incentivise parties to make and seriously consider reasonable offers.
In addition to formal offers, parties can engage in other forms of ADR such as mediation, arbitration (if agreed), early neutral evaluation, or expert determination. Courts will often ask whether the parties have attempted ADR and may even pause the proceedings (staying the case) for a short period to allow negotiations or a mediation to take place. A party who unreasonably refuses to consider ADR can be penalised in costs, even if they win at trial, as the courts view cooperation in settlement discussions as part of conducting litigation in accordance with the overriding objective.
Empirically, a large proportion of civil claims settle before trial. It is common for parties to negotiate a settlement after exchanging evidence (when each side’s strengths and weaknesses become clearer) or as the trial date approaches (in the face of mounting costs and risks). Even on the day of trial, parties sometimes reach last-minute settlements. The CPR encourages such outcomes by allowing flexibility in discontinuing claims or agreeing consent orders if terms are reached.
Key points: Settling a dispute out of court can save considerable time and cost. Formal Part 36 offers are a strategic tool and should be seriously evaluated when received. The court expects parties to engage with ADR (e.g. mediation) at appropriate junctures, and may impose cost sanctions for those who outright refuse to consider any form of compromise.
Pre-Trial Preparation
As the trial approaches, both sides must complete a number of preparatory steps to ensure the hearing runs smoothly. Parties will usually prepare skeleton arguments (outlines of their legal arguments and key authorities), which are filed with the court and exchanged shortly before trial. In fast-track cases, skeleton arguments might be relatively brief and exchanged just before the hearing; in multi-track cases, they can be more detailed and are often filed a week or two in advance.
The parties must also collaborate to compile the trial bundle – a paginated, indexed set of the important documents that the court will need to see during the trial (pleadings, key evidence, important correspondence, etc.). Typically, the Claimant’s lawyers take the lead in preparing a draft bundle index, which is then agreed with the Defendant. The final bundle (now often prepared in electronic form, though paper copies may be required for the judge) must be lodged with the court by a specified date before trial, usually specified in the case management directions.
Courts often require the parties to complete a Pre-Trial Checklist or Listing Questionnaire (per Practice Direction 29 or 39A) as the trial date nears. This checklist confirms that all pre-trial steps have been completed – e.g. disclosure done, witness statements exchanged, experts’ reports served – and identifies any outstanding issues that need the court’s attention before trial. The checklist also asks whether the estimated trial time has changed, whether interpreters or special arrangements are needed, and whether the parties have attempted settlement. If any last-minute applications are necessary (for example, to amend a statement of case, or to exclude certain evidence, or to adjourn the trial), they should be made as early as possible and ideally well before the trial date.
Sometimes the court will list a brief Pre-Trial Review hearing, especially in multi-track cases, to go over these matters. At a pre-trial review, the judge can address any problems with compliance, give further directions, and make sure the case is truly ready for the hearing. This is the last opportunity to iron out procedural issues so that the trial itself can focus on the substantive dispute.
Key points: In the lead-up to trial, parties exchange skeleton arguments, finalise the trial bundle of documents, and complete a pre-trial checklist or review. All evidence should be in order and any final applications (e.g. to amend the case or for relief from sanctions) should be dealt with before the trial. Proper preparation ensures that the trial can proceed without unnecessary interruptions or adjournments.
Trial and Judgment
At trial, the Claimant (who brought the claim) normally goes first. The Claimant’s advocate will make an opening statement outlining the case, and then call the Claimant’s witnesses. Each witness will generally attest to their written witness statement (which stands as their evidence-in-chief) and may amplify it briefly. The Defendant’s advocate then cross-examines the Claimant’s witnesses, and the Claimant’s advocate may re-examine on any new points raised. After the Claimant’s side has presented all its evidence, the Defendant will present its own case in the same manner (opening statement if not already given, then witnesses and cross-examination). In some cases, closing submissions are given orally by each side after all evidence is heard; in others, especially longer trials, the judge may invite written closing submissions.
Most civil trials are heard by a single judge. Jury trials are extremely rare in civil cases today (they survive in only a few types of cases like defamation or malicious prosecution, and even then are seldom used). Trials may take place in person in a courtroom, or, increasingly, via video link or hybrid arrangements. Since the COVID-19 pandemic, courts have had express powers to conduct hearings by video or telephone where appropriate (CPR 39.1). By 2025, many interim hearings and even some full trials are conducted remotely, although for final trials involving witness testimony, in-person hearings are often preferred if feasible, to better assess witness evidence.
Once all evidence has been heard and submissions made, the judge will deliver a judgment. This might happen immediately at the end of the hearing (an ex tempore oral judgment), or the judge may reserve judgment to be given in writing at a later date, especially in complex cases. The judgment will set out the judge’s findings of fact, the application of the law to those facts, and the final decision (for example, which party is liable and what remedy is granted). The result could be an award of damages, an injunction or other order, or a dismissal of the claim.
The judge will also make an order as to costs – deciding who should pay the legal costs of the action. Under the “loser pays” principle, the general rule is that the unsuccessful party is ordered to pay the reasonable costs of the successful party (CPR 44.2), but the court has discretion and will consider each case. Importantly, as of October 2023, most claims valued up to £100,000 (those on the fast track or intermediate track) are now subject to Fixed Recoverable Costs, meaning the recoverable legal costs are limited to fixed amounts set by the rules, rather than being assessed in detail. In such cases, the costs order will usually simply award the fixed scale of costs to the winning side. In higher-value or multi-track cases, costs remain assessed: the court may order a detailed assessment if not agreed, and only proportionate costs will be allowed. On the small claims track, different costs rules apply – in general, each side bears its own costs win or lose (except for certain fixed sums like court fees or witness expenses), so cost orders in small claims are uncommon.
Key points: The trial is the culmination of the case, with each side presenting evidence and arguments for the judge’s determination. The judge’s judgment will decide liability and any remedies. A costs order will usually require the losing party to pay the winner’s costs – but for cases up to £100,000, the amount recoverable is now largely fixed by rule (providing certainty in advance). In multi-track and complex cases, costs are assessed and the principle of proportionality applies. Small claims have separate cost rules where legal costs are mostly not recoverable.
Post Judgment and Appeals
Once judgment is given, the litigation may not be entirely over. The losing party might seek permission to appeal if they believe there was a significant error of law or serious procedural irregularity in the judgment. In most civil cases, an appeal from a trial in the County Court or High Court lies to the Court of Appeal (Civil Division). Permission to appeal is required and is granted only if the court considers that the appeal would have a real prospect of success or there is some other compelling reason for the appeal to be heard (CPR 52.3). The appeal is not a re-run of the trial; new evidence is not usually allowed. Instead, the appeal court reviews whether the law was applied correctly and whether the findings were justified by the evidence. The Court of Appeal may uphold the original decision, vary it, or overturn it (in whole or part). A further appeal to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom is possible but very rare – the Supreme Court only hears cases that raise points of general public importance, and permission from either the Court of Appeal or Supreme Court itself is required.
If the Claimant wins a money judgment (an order that the Defendant pay a sum of money), the next consideration is enforcement if the Defendant does not pay voluntarily. The Claimant (now judgment creditor) can choose from several enforcement methods provided by the CPR and the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007. Common methods include: a writ of control (execution) by bailiffs or High Court Enforcement Officers to seize and sell the debtor’s goods; a charging order on the debtor’s property (securing the judgment debt against land or assets); an attachment of earnings order (deducting sums from the debtor’s wages); or, less commonly, seeking the debtor’s bankruptcy or a third-party debt order (freezing and seizing funds owed to the debtor by someone else). The appropriate method depends on what assets or income the losing party has. The court can also summon the debtor to provide information about their finances (an Order to Obtain Information).
Judgments normally accrue interest from the date they are given (at 8% per annum for judgments in the High Court, or the statutory rate for County Court judgments, unless a different rate is specified by contract or statute). Thus, delaying payment can increase the amount owed. The successful party can usually recover additional enforcement costs from the debtor as well.
Key points: The losing party may seek to appeal, but needs permission and a valid legal ground – appeals focus on errors of law, not just dissatisfaction with the outcome. Only a small fraction of cases reach the Court of Appeal, and fewer still go to the Supreme Court. If a judgment awards money, the winner can take enforcement action if the loser doesn’t pay. Enforcement tools (writs, charging orders, etc.) are available to ensure judgments are satisfied, and interest is added to unpaid judgment sums.
Recent Reforms and Practical Considerations
Litigation procedure continues to evolve. Key recent developments include:
- Online Civil Money Claims (PD 51R): HMCTS now operates a unified online system (MyHMCTS) for issuing and managing civil money claims, replacing the older Money Claim Online and paper-based processes. As of 2025, represented parties can handle the entire claim digitally – from filing and service to directions and even obtaining judgment – through the online portal. Practice Direction 51R (an online procedure pilot) has been extended, effectively streamlining early case management and payment processes in money claims.
- Civil Justice Council Disclosure Reforms: The rules on disclosure have been updated to promote proportionality in the exchange of documents. Instead of routine “standard disclosure,” parties now typically agree on a narrower, issue-focused scope of disclosure or follow the permanent disclosure scheme under PD 57AD (which replaced the Disclosure Pilot in the Business and Property Courts). Parties often prepare a list of issues for disclosure and a case summary, and the court decides what disclosure model is appropriate. The emphasis is on exchanging the key relevant documents (via electronic or paper bundles) without incurring excessive costs on wide-ranging searches.
- Costs Management: Since 2013, most multi-track cases have been subject to costs budgeting under Practice Direction 3E. Parties must file and exchange budgets of their expected legal costs early in the case, and the court will approve or adjust these budgets at a Costs Management Conference (often part of the first CMC). Failure to file a budget can lead to serious penalties (usually, a party in default cannot recover beyond court fees). This costs management regime aims to keep litigation costs proportionate and predictable in larger cases.
- Track Limit Changes (2021): In April 2021, the fast track upper limit was increased from £15,000 to £25,000 (CPR 26.6) (Typical litigation claim long -1.docx). This reform brought more cases (those up to £25k) into the fast track, meaning they benefit from a one-day trial and streamlined procedures rather than being treated as multi-track. The small claims track limit remained £10,000 for most claims (with lower sub-limits of £1,000 for personal injury damages for pain and suffering, and for certain housing cases). These changes were designed to reflect inflation and divert moderate claims away from the resource-intensive multi-track.
- Intermediate Track Introduction (2023): From 1 October 2023, a new Intermediate Track was formally introduced for civil claims valued between £25,000 and £100,000. This track is intended for moderately complex cases that can be tried in no more than three days with a limited number of expert witnesses (usually no more than two per side). The intermediate track fills the gap between fast track and multi-track, allowing the court to manage mid-value cases in a proportionate way with standard directions tailored to a shorter trial timeframe. Judges retain discretion to send particularly complex sub-£100k cases to the multi-track, but otherwise many non-complex cases in this range will now be handled in the intermediate track.
- Extended Fixed Recoverable Costs (FRC) Regime: Also effective 1 October 2023, the Fixed Recoverable Costs regime was expanded to cover most civil claims valued up to £100,000. Previously, fixed costs applied mainly to low-value personal injury claims and certain fast track cases, but the 2023 reforms extend FRC across the fast track and the new intermediate track. This means that for the majority of cases in these tracks, the legal costs that the winning party can recover from the losing party are fixed in advance by the CPR (set out in tables in CPR Part 45 and its Practice Directions) rather than being subject to detailed assessment. The FRC scales vary by the stage reached and the complexity band of the case. The change brings greater cost certainty for litigants in mid-value cases, though it also means parties must carefully consider cost efficiency (since any work beyond the fixed recoverable amount cannot be claimed back from the opponent). There are limited exceptions to the new FRC regime – for example, certain housing disrepair claims have been exempted from FRC for a temporary period, and some complex case types (such as mesothelioma actions) are excluded – but the vast majority of standard civil claims up to £100k issued after October 2023 are now subject to fixed recoverable costs.
- Remote and Hybrid Hearings: The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the use of technology in court hearings. Changes to the CPR (e.g. CPR 3.1(2)(d) and Part 39) now expressly empower courts to hold hearings by telephone or video conference. In 2025, it is routine for case management hearings and even some trials to be conducted remotely (fully virtual) or in a hybrid format (with some participants remote and others in court). This has improved efficiency and reduced the need for travel, but it also requires lawyers and witnesses to adapt – ensuring reliable technology, electronic bundles, and observing proper courtroom etiquette remotely. Judges will consider the nature of the case when deciding on remote hearings; for example, if witness credibility is key, a judge may prefer an in-person hearing. The right to a fair hearing remains paramount, so the court will order an in-person trial if needed to ensure justice is done.
- Pre-Action Conduct and Sanctions: Recent case law has reinforced the importance of complying with pre-action protocols and court directions. Courts have shown willingness to sanction parties who ignore pre-action obligations or unreasonably refuse ADR – for instance, by denying them costs or ordering them to pay the opponent’s costs on an indemnity basis. Additionally, the Denton/Mitchell principles for relief from sanctions (established by case law) remain critical: if a party misses a deadline, they must apply promptly and show a good reason, and the court will assess the seriousness of the breach and all the circumstances. The culture in 2025 is one of strict compliance – parties are expected to meet deadlines and procedural requirements, and deviations without excuse are seldom tolerated.
- Data Protection and Privacy: Litigation must also account for privacy laws and data protection (GDPR). Documents disclosed often contain personal or confidential information. Courts can order that such material be kept confidential (for example, via confidentiality rings or anonymization). Parties commonly agree to redact irrelevant sensitive data (such as individuals’ contact details or non-essential financial info) in documents. Medical records or similar personal data might be disclosed in a restricted manner. Compliance with the Data Protection Act 2018 is now routinely noted in case management, ensuring that handling of personal data during litigation is lawful and proportionate.
Throughout these developments, the overriding principle remains proportionate, fair, and efficient resolution of disputes. Litigants are expected to cooperate with each other and with the court, keeping the process on track and costs in check. Embracing new digital tools (like online filing and remote hearings) and updated rules (such as fixed costs and tailored disclosure) can help parties navigate the system more efficiently.
Key practical tips: Litigation typically takes many months (often over a year) from issue to trial. Claimants should begin by gathering evidence and complying with pre-action requirements early. Defendants should never ignore a claim – doing so risks a default judgment. Both sides in multi-track cases should prepare a realistic costs budget and keep it updated (for fast track and intermediate track cases, be mindful of the fixed cost limits when deciding how much work is proportionate). Consider ADR opportunities seriously at each stage; a good settlement can be better than a costly victory. Finally, keep detailed records of all case documents, correspondence, and court deadlines to avoid mistakes – meticulous organisation is crucial for managing a case effectively.
Conclusion
A typical litigation claim in 2025 proceeds from pre-action protocol compliance, through issue and service of proceedings, to allocation onto the appropriate track, followed by disclosure, evidence exchange, possible ADR, and then trial and judgment – all under a well-defined procedural regime. While the CPR and Practice Directions are detailed and technical, the courts and legal professionals aim to guide parties through the process. By following the rules and court orders diligently, and by taking advantage of new tools (like online case systems and fixed cost provisions), litigants can conduct claims efficiently and with greater certainty about time and cost. This guide has provided a comprehensive roadmap of the process, reflecting the current law and practice as of 2025.
Need Expert Litigation Advice?
If you require professional guidance or representation regarding a litigation claim in England and Wales, the experienced solicitors at Carruthers Law are here to help. For an initial consultation or to discuss your case in detail, please contact us: Telephone: 0151 541 2040 Email: info@carruthers-law.co.uk
Our dedicated team is ready to provide expert advice tailored to your situation, ensuring that your legal rights and interests are fully protected.