 |  |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|  | |  | |
(c)
Reservations expressed
(i)
Need to identify maker of statement of truth
Some respondents to the consultation
stressed the importance of it being made clear
who should sign the statement of truth. In relation to pleadings,
the need for
guidance on this question was acknowledged in the CPR by additions being made to
the relevant practice direction.
The Working Party recognizes that guidance along
similar lines should be included in the rules. The position under the CPR may be
summarised as follows.
Document put forward by "the party"
Where pleadings are verified by a statement of truth, this amounts to a representation
to the court that "the party putting forward" the pleading believes the facts stated in it
are true.
Thus, although the rules permit the person signing the statement of truth to be either
the party or the party's legal representative, the pleading remains the party's document
which he puts forward as representing his case. The statement signed by the legal
representative will refer to the client's belief, not his own.
Where a party is an individual and he or she signs the statement of truth, no difficulty
arises. The signatory and the party are the same person so that the representation that
the facts stated are true is unequivocally made.
Notes
Such as the APAA and a member of the HKFI.
Witness statements pose no difficulty. It is the witness who must sign, indicating that his account of
the facts is true: CPR 22.1(6)(b) and 22PD.3.2.
White Book 22.1.15.
22PD3.7. The effect of signature by the legal representative is considered below.
|
 |
|