0370 270 6000

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

Job applicant receives settlement due to unlawful age discrimination at interview

Janice Walsh applied for a job with Domino’s Pizza, hoping to secure a role as a Delivery Driver. However things quickly took a turn for the worse during her initial interview, with the very first question that she was asked relating to her age. Ms Walsh was ultimately informed that she had not been successful in her application.

View blog

Covid Rent Arrears: Cinema operators’ appeals dismissed

The Court of Appeal has dismissed two cases regarding rent arrears accrued during the Covid lockdowns. The cases are London Trocadero (2015) LLP v Picturehouse Cinemas Ltd and Bank of New York Mellon (International) Ltd v Cine-UK Ltd.

View blog

Proceed with caution – covenants in franchise agreements

In the recent case of Dwyer (UK Franchising) Limited v Fredbar Limited and ano’r [2022] EWCA Civ 889, the Court of Appeal considered the reasonableness of restrictive covenants in a franchise agreement.

View blog

80% hours for 100% pay? That’ll do nicely

As has been widely reported this week, some 3,000 UK workers are taking part in a six month trial to assess the viability of a four-day working week without any reduction in their normal pay.

View blog

Mailing list sign up

Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.

Sign up