There were four sets of amendment rules in 2010 and there has already been one set in 2011.

Previous articles have dealt with the Civil Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2010 (SI 2010/621) – which accompanied the Pre-Action Protocol for Low Value Personal Injury Claims in Road Traffic Accidents and came into force on 30 April 2010 – and the Civil Procedure (Amendment No. 2) Rules 2010 (SI2010/1953) which came into force on 1 October 2010.

This article covers the three further sets of amendment rules since.

However, although these changes matter, even taking all three sets together it is fair to describe their totality as minor.

Perhaps the most interesting and important amendments are those concerning part 6 (Service).

Civil Procedure (Amendment No. 3) Rules 2010 (SI 2010/2577)

These are minor amendments relating to the Divisional Court.

Divisional courts were first established pursuant to section 41 of the Judicature Act 1873, and consist of two or more judges of the High Court sitting to transact business which cannot be disposed of by a single judge.

Much of its work is assigned to it by statute.

Recently it became apparent that the CPR 1998 were deficient in acknowledging this.

Accordingly, these rules amend rules 54.10 and 54.12 to make it clear that, in accordance with section 19(3) of the Senior Courts Act 1981, the jurisdiction of the High Court in relation to judicial review proceedings may be exercised by a Divisional Court where the court so directs.

The amended rules came into force on 26 October 2010.

Civil Procedure (Amendment No. 4) Rules 2010 (SI 2010/3038)

These rules were made and laid before parliament on 23 December 2010 and came into force on Christmas Eve 2010.

However, these rules were not made by the Civil Procedure Rules Committee, but by the lord chancellor in exercise of the power conferred by section 29 of the Terrorist Asset-Freezing Act 2010. The CPR Committee will be responsible for any future amendments under that act.

The title of the 2010 act speaks for itself. The act enables the Treasury to impose financial restrictions by way of ‘designation’ on and in relation to certain persons believed to be, or to have been, involved in terrorist activities.

These rules amend part 79 of the CPR 1998 by inserting a new section into part 79 concerning appeals, which modifies the application of part 52 to such appeals.

Section 26 of the 2010 act provides that challenges to decisions relating to both interim and final designations will be heard by way of appeal to the High Court.

Other decisions taken by the Treasury under the act may be reviewed by the High Court applying the principles applicable to judicial review. The new section 3 to part 79 sets out the procedure for appeals before the High Court and any appeal to the Court of Appeal.

Civil Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2011

These rule changes came into force on 6 April 2011.

Part 78 is amended to give effect to Directive 2008/52/EC of the European Parliament and of the council of 21 May 2008.

The rules make provision enabling the transposition of article 6 (enforceability of agreements resulting from mediation) and article 7 (confidentiality of mediation) on certain aspects of mediation in civil and commercial matters by inserting a new ‘Section III – Mediation Directive’ into part 78.

The new section includes information on the scope of the section (rule 78.23), rules in relation to article 6 of the directive (78.24 and 78.25) and rules in relation to article 7 of the directive (78.26 to 78.28).

There are also consequential amendments to parts 5, 7, 8, 31 and 32.

In part 6, ‘Service’ is further amended to give effect to treaty obligations under European law.

Rule 6.7 is completely rewritten and is now entitled ‘Service on a solicitor or European Lawyer within the United Kingdom or in any other EEA state’.

The amended part 6 (with consequential amendments in rules 10.5 and 16.5) allow for the address of a European lawyer in an EEA state, or, for a litigant in person, the litigant in person’s normal address in the UK, or failing that any EEA state, to be provided as an address for service.

Rules 6.7(1), 6.7(2) and 7(3) repay careful study. A claim form must be served at an address given in accordance with these rules – Nanglegan v Royal Free Hampstead NHS Trust [2001] EWCA Civ 127.

The rules apply not just to solicitors in England and Wales but also to solicitors in Scotland and Northern Ireland and to European lawyers in any EEA state.

The rules are also amended to update references to civil procedure conventions or treaties that make provision for service of documents.

The texts of the civil procedure treaties that the UK has entered into can be found on the Foreign and Commonwealth Office website.

There are amendments to part 45 to provide for a scale of fixed costs that will be awarded in cases where HM Revenue & Customs successfully obtains judgment in respect of unpaid tax.

Previously, there was doubt over whether HMRC could recover anything other than litigant-in-person costs, and often in practice only court fees were sought.

It will be recalled that claims by HMRC for the recovery of tax are not allocated to track and are governed by the wholly separate procedure in Practice Direction 7D-Claims for the Recovery of Taxes and Duties.

(PD7D is not really a practice direction at all but a wholly separate procedure for claims by HMRC that really ought to be in rules contained, preferably, in a separate part).

The doubt concerning HMRC’s ability to recover costs is resolved in its favour but on a limited fixed-costs basis.

Conclusion

The changes are important in the specific situations in which they apply but are mercifully limited in number.

District Judge Robert Hill sits at Scarborough County Court. He is a member of the Civil Procedure Rules Committee