Update 29 enters the CPR arena

District Judge Michael Walker starts his summary of the latest CPR update

Weighing in at a cool 2.3kgs the 29th update to the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (CPR) is no lightweight.

However, much of it is housekeeping.

This, and a second article next week, will look just at the substantive changes.

When is it in force?

On the whole, the answer is 2 December 2002.

That in itself causes a problem: does the reader update the Blue Books now or is it a task best left to later? Furthermore, there are three exceptions to the 2 December date.

Traffic enforcement

Most solicitors might only give this a second thought after that ticket has been posted on the car.

But if that happens, have a look at the new part 75 and practice direction relating to traffic enforcement which together have replaced the County Court Rules, order 48B since 1 October 2002.

Small claims pilot scheme

The pilot was the subject of an earlier Benchmarks (see [2002] Gazette, 4 July, 36), following the 28th update.

The word is that the pilot is going well but the number of cases falling into it needs to be increased.

As a result, the pilot, which only applies to Lincoln, Wandsworth and Wigan County Courts, is to be extended through to the end of this year.

Homelessness appeals

These changes took effect from 30 September although, oddly, will only appear in the 30th update due to be released early next year.

Anyone aggrieved by a local housing authority's refusal of accommodation may - following an unsuccessful internal review - appeal, on a point of law only, to the county court under section 204 of the Homelessness Act 1996.

Pending the appeal, section 204A now affords to the homeless person the additional right to apply to the circuit judge (but not to a district judge) for an order requiring the authority to ensure that accommodation is available.

Changes to Practice Direction 52, dealing with appeals, make it clear that the appeal under section 204 and the application under section 204A should be in the one appellant's notice.

In exceptional circumstances, Practice Direction 52, paragraph 24.2(4) envisages that the court may make a without-notice order for temporary accommodation to be made available pending a hearing at which the authority might be heard.

Until publication of the 30th update, full details may be found on the Lord Chancellor's Department Web site at: www.lcd.gov.uk/civil/pdamend.htm

So what about the 2 December changes?

Listing questionnaires

A common mistake with listing questionnaires (LQs) is to think that they are the basis on which the court will list fast-track, and occasionally multi-track, cases.

As we all in fact know, the trial date will almost certainly have been fixed some weeks beforehand; at the very least, a trial window will have been given.

The purpose of the LQ is to enable the parties and the court to check that all is in order for the trial to proceed in an efficient and timely manner.

It really is a pre-trial checklist and from 2 December that is the term by which it will be known - save on court forms, where, to save an otherwise considerable expenditure, the LQ nomenclature will remain.

Much lies behind the change in name and the revamping of the N170 form that will be known as the 'Listing Questionnaire (Pre-trial checklist)'.

The assumption will be that each party has done all that is expected of it; if directions are still outstanding, the new form asks for the date by which compliance will be achieved.

If further directions are required from the court then the pre-trial checklist must be returned with an application notice N244, fee and draft order.

The new form is available as part of the 29th update.

Electronic filing

Don't get too excited.

The provision in part 5 for the filing of documents with the court either by fax or by electronic means will only apply to Walsall County Court where fascinating experiments are under way to test the use of information technology in the court environment.

Practitioners who deal with Walsall County Court need to have a look at the new Practice Direction 5B.

Hard copies

A source of endless frustration in the county court is the submission of a fax to the court followed by a hard copy by post or DX.

Efforts to stop the practice have, to date, failed.

Now, Practice Direction 5, paragraph 5.3 expressly states that where a party files a document by fax, he must not send an additional hard copy.

No sanction for breach of that provision is specified in the practice direction but the offender can be sure of some words of admonition from the judges before whom they may appear.

Best avoided.

Service of foreign process

One for the experts.

If you dabble in the service of foreign process then from 2 December you need to pay heed to new provisions in rules 6.32 to 6.35.

Money Claims Online

Money Claims Online (MCOL) enables a claimant to electronically issue a claim (subject to certain limitations) using the facilities at Northampton.

Defendants may file their acknowledgements of service or defences electronically too.

That is now stated more clearly in a rewriting of Practice Direction 7E that covers MCOL.

The MCOL scheme is also extended to 31 January 2004.

If the size of a court were measured just by the number of claims it issued, then MCOL would be the sixth largest court in the country.

Not bad for an idea which only started last Christmas.

Verbosity

If a statement of case exceeds 25 pages (excluding schedules) a short summary must also be filed and served (see Practice Direction 16, paragraph 1.4).

Beneficiaries

By virtue of a new rule 19.7A, a claim may be brought by or against trustees, executors or administrators in that capacity without adding the beneficiaries; any judgment or order will be binding on them nevertheless.

Disposal hearings

A big problem, apparently, is a wide disparity in practice at disposal hearings.

So every litigation practitioner needs to read the new Practice Direction 26, paragraph 12.

Paragraph 12.4 makes it clear that a disposal hearing will not normally last more than 30 minutes and the court will not normally hear oral evidence.

At the hearing, the court may decide the amount payable and give judgment, but only if the disposal hearing has been allocated to the small claims track or, alternatively, the claimant has served his written evidence at least three days before the hearing.

Alternatively, the court may give directions for the future conduct of the case.

Take my advice and read it.

District Judge Walker sits at Wandsworth County Court and is a contributor to Jordan's Civil Court Service