0370 270 6000

already registered?

Please sign in with your existing account details.

need to register?

Register to access exclusive content, sign up to receive our updates and personalise your experience on brownejacobson.com.

Privacy statement - Terms and conditions

strike outs galore with pre-trial questionnaire non-compliance

21 April 2015

In Waterman Transport Services Ltd v Torchwood Properties Ltd, Akenhead J in the Technology and Construction Court has ruled that the respondent’s failure to substantially complete the pre-trial questionnaire was not just a minor failure to comply but was substantive non-compliance. The judge held that it therefore followed that the respondent’s defence should be struck out.

The respondent (T) had been largely unrepresented in the claim that had been brought against it for failure to pay invoices for services that the applicant (W) had provided. W applied for summary judgment.

T submitted a vague and unparticularised counterclaim for professional negligence that the judge also struck out. T had failed to clarify at an early juncture how many witnesses would be called at trial and what expert evidence was going to be relied upon. There was very little useful information contained in the pre-trial questionnaire and T did not attend the pre-trial review. The day before the application hearing a witness statement of T gave information on witnesses and expert evidence that was substantially different to that it had previously given and made a great difference to the amount of time needed for trial.

The message from the judge in this case is clear; do not try to mislead the court with vague and haphazard attempts at complying with court orders and directions. A pre-trial questionnaire is important not only for the parties but also for the court diary and freeing up the court for other users. The case follows a harsh path of Mitchell and Denton et al in respect of sanctions, more so than you would expect for a litigant in person.

related opinions

Can an application to postpone a hearing be refused?

This case highlights the importance of Claimants obtaining their own medical evidence in such matters especially when it is pivotal to their claim.

View blog

A landlord’s promise, a tenant’s power

When it comes to leases, most people believe that landlords hold most of the power. However, in relation to long residential leases, the tables may well have recently turned in one respect at least following a recent Supreme Court decision.

View blog

High Court extends employer’s duty of care to Dubai whistleblower

Employers with global networks which include a base in the UK should be aware that they can face expensive and damaging negligence claims from employees who are based overseas regardless of the whistleblowing regime.

View blog

A year on: the Capped Costs Pilot Scheme

On 14 January 2019 a Capped Costs Pilot Scheme was introduced in the Leeds and Manchester Business and Property Courts, and has been set to run for two years.

View blog

mailing list sign up

Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.

Sign up