 |  |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|  | |  | |
(a)
Judicial scrutiny of pleadings
This Proposal, which generally received support,
raised for consultation the
desirability of a rule giving judges proactive powers in respect of inadequate
pleadings. Thus, for instance, by CPR 18.1, judges in England and Wales are given
power to order a party to :-
"clarify any matter which is in dispute in the proceedings; or give additional information in
relation to any such matter, whether or not the matter is contained or referred to in a
statement of case."
Where an order is made and clarification is given, the other party has to respond to the
case as clarified.
The Working Party considers that it would be useful for the court to have this power,
not by reference to any overriding objective,
but as a specific rule in the context of
pleadings. Such a power would promote the proper functions of pleadings and could
be particularly helpful in cases involving unrepresented litigants who may be ill-
equipped to require needed clarification from the other side. A power of this sort
ought to be exercised flexibly, for example, by requiring a party to give necessary
particulars or to file a fresh pleading properly setting out his case, as the circumstances
may require.
Notes
Including support from the Bar Association, the Law Society, the BSCPI, the High Court masters, a
firm of solicitors and the BCC.
Nor to the underlying objectives discussed in Section 4 above.
|
 |
|