CJR Final Report, Section 9: Pleadings

There is, however, a danger that such a rule, aimed at countering insufficient pleading,

may result in the opposite defect of prolixity or inordinate detail. It should

accordingly be made clear that in pleading a defence substantively, the defendant

should not deal obsessively with each and every allegation in the statement of claim

but that he should aim to strike the balance mentioned above.

A useful provision to this end is CPR 16.5(3) which provides :-

"A defendant who—

(a)

fails to deal with an allegation; but

(b)

has set out in his defence the nature of his case in relation to the issue to which

that allegation is relevant;

shall be taken to require that allegation to be proved."

This helpfully lays the emphasis on disclosing the nature of the defendant's case and

relieves the defendant from dealing with every single allegation in the statement of

claim, provided the nature of his case relevant to that allegation has been made

clear.

It is recommended that such a provision be adopted.

Notes

This operates as an exception to the general rule which would remain in force, namely, that an

allegation of fact in the statement of claim which is not traversed in the defence is deemed to be