 |  |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|  | |  | |
(b)
Justification and consultation response
The White Book points to two justifications for requiring pleadings to be verified :-
"First, if a party is required to certify his belief in the accuracy and truth of the matters put
forward the statement of case is less likely to include assertions that are speculative and
fanciful and designed to obfuscate ...... Secondly, in certain circumstances, a statement of
case may be relied on as evidence. If it is to be used as such it is right that the facts asserted
in it should be verified."
The second justification is ancillary. It is convenient and may avoid duplication of
work to be able to rely on a verified pleading as evidence. But the true justification is
that it is intended to be salutary for a party and his legal representative to have to
verify a pleading on penalty of contempt. It is likely to deter sloppy and speculative
pleadings and to provide a disincentive against advancing a downright dishonest case.
As Patten J stated in Clarke v Marlborough Fine Art (London) Ltd [2002] 1 WLR
1731 at 1742 :-
"The purpose of Part 22 is simply to exclude factual allegations which to the knowledge of
the claimant or other party are untrue or which the party putting forward the pleading to the
court is unable to say are true.
In the most simple case the requirements of CPR r 22.1 will, if observed, exclude untruthful
or fanciful claims but the notes to Part 22 also indicate that the purpose of the new rule was to
discourage the pleading of cases which when settled were unsupported by evidence and
which were put forward in the hope that something might turn up on disclosure or at trial."
The greater part of the respondents who addressed the issue
supported introduction
of a verification requirement although a number did so with certain reservations.
Those reservations are addressed below. Subject to the modifications and refinements
arising out of such reservations, the Working Party recommends adoption of Proposal
11.
Recommendation 26: Proposal 11 (requiring pleadings to be verified by a
statement of truth) should be adopted as modified and supplemented by
Notes
White Book 22.0.2.
Including the Bar Association and the Law Society. The Bar Association pointed out that
proceedings commenced by modes other than writ generally require a supporting affidavit.
|
 |
|