New Rules Regarding Statements of Truth in Civil Proceedings

Wed, 26 Feb 2020

The 113th Update to the Civil Procedure Rules is bringing about a number of amendments to various CPR Practice Directions (see: https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/pdf/update/cpr-113th-pd-update.pdf). This article will focus on the proposed changes to statements of truth brought about by amendments to paragraph 2 of Practice Direction 22. These changes come into force on 6th April 2020.

The form of the statement of truth verifying a statement of case, a response, an application notice or a notice of objections should now be as follows:

[I believe][the (claimant or as may be) believes] that the facts stated in this [name document being verified] are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.

The form of the statement of truth verifying a witness statement should now be as follows (and provided in the language of the witness statement):

I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.

Furthermore:

  • A statement of truth must be in the witness’ own language (new paragraph 2.4)
  • A statement of truth must be dated with the date on which it was signed (new paragraph 2.5)
  • There are additional requirements for situations where the witness/client does not read English as can be seen in the amendment document.

These amendments should be read alongside the changes to PD32, including the necessity to draft witness statements in the witness’ own language and providing information as to the process by which the witness statement has been prepared.

These amendments bring about important changes that all practitioners will need to be aware of.

Richard undertakes a broad spectrum of clinical negligence, personal injury and inquest work acting on behalf of both claimants and defendants. Richard has experience of trials (both on his own and as led junior counsel), interlocutory and approval hearings in clinical negligence matters, as well as inquests (including Article 2 inquests and inquests held with a jury). He is ranked by Chambers UK Bar 2020 and Legal 500 2020 (Tier 1) for his clinical negligence work.”

Related articles

On the 1st April 2020 HMCTS published a note on the Civil Court Listing Priorities. This is divided into two sections: - Priority 1 work includes work that ­­­must be done and Priority 2...

Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2020
We just wanted to communicate to you all what our Personal Injury and Clinical Negligence Groups are doing and to assure you as best as we can it is business as usual....

Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2020
This note attempts to summarise the current working practice for Courts and Tribunals in England and Wales: is the court or tribunal simply closed, open for certain business or operating new remote procedures?...

Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2020