Do you or don't you?

[charitynjw]

Hi

I've read recent changes to etiquette re court cases, & it would seem now that whatever you write to the court, you have to advise the other party of same.

Does that apply to written skeleton arguments?

[R0b]

Doesn't 39.8(2) assist on this?

(2) Paragraph (1) applies to any communication in which any representation is made to the court on a matter of substance or procedure but does not apply to communications that are purely routine, uncontentious and administrative.

Obviously under small claims track, unless there is a requirement to file and serve skeleton arguments it is not necessary to do so. However I generally do as a matter of courtesy because I have seen some judges adjourn the hearing (rightly or wrongly) on the premise the other side hasn't had a chance to see the skeleton and an opportunity to present arguments.

I would consider skeleton arguments as being routine and administrative rather than representations of substance or procedure. Overall, the clause was intended to curtail parties (particularly LiPs) from writing to the court behind the other parties back but also there are other provisions in the CPR that govern the filing and serving of documents which the other sides needs to be looped in on, so this would sort of contradict that position if we took a literal approach to it.

I'm thinking cases where the LiP writes to the court of non-compliance, or where there is a request for adjournment due to illness and the LiP cannot attend the hearing will probably be captured by this provision.

[charitynjw]

R0b

Cheers for that, Rob.
I can always count on you to come through!