The documentation horror show

2 Dec 2014Feature

Lawyers should use their common sense when preparing court bundles, says an exasperated District Judge Ayers

I deal with a couple of issues in this light-hearted article but they come with a health warning. I do not dispute that the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) and Family Procedure Rules (FPR) are set out as they are for a reason and should be complied with however, in many instances they are considered in a one-size fits-all approach.

Yet in many cases they don't, or they could unnecessarily increase costs. The place to air views, so that you do not fall foul of the judiciary, is at local court user meetings where you may be given certain flexibility. Local practice directions are of course prohibited.

Doubling work

First, court staff are an increasingly rare commodity and they have far too much to do, in far too short a time scale. They do not 'own' files as you do in your practices and are liable to do the work more than once if you fax and email the same document. You may feel there is too much to lose and that you have to ensure your file arrives safely. All you do is cause that limited time to be wasted by making work that will be done two or three times for example, by a member of staff trying to find a file that has been actioned already, or even worse sending a file to a district judge more than once.

The moral is: file in time with the hearing date clearly endorsed. Do that and you cannot be criticised by the judge. Also, please lose those fancy cardboard corners, and stapling in more than one place: they hamper filing and it takes time to remove them.

The CPR and FPR make it quite clear when, where, and how electronic communications can be used. Do look them up and read them. Letters that come in endorsed 'also sent by email and fax' show an ignorance and total disregard for the rules. My court used to award a wooden spoon at court user meetings to the worst offenders with a request that a cheque was sent to a local charity. This policy soon improved matters.

Bundle hate

Second - bundles. I personally hate them, except for at final hearings, as all the papers I need are in the court file, unless there is something which would not be - for example, a schedule of costs for a costs claim against the opponent based upon their behaviour.

My judicial colleagues and
I have a relaxed attitude to bundles as they seem to be a huge cost burden on the profession for no real benefit. We tell our practitioners to use common sense. If you insist on filing the bundle, look at the rules carefully to see what should be included and don't overlook the word 'relevant'. It is there for a
reason. SJ

Helpful bundle hints

Ensure there are not too many pages in the bundle. A district judge or witness should be able to turn a page.
For small bundles use a small ring binder, if necessary by agreeing a core bundle with your opponent.
Staples should not be used. However, if you insist, then staple in the top right or left corner. Do not put it slap bang wallop in the middle of the page.
Advise admin assistants to turn the backing page over and to copy it – but I ask, why bother?
If it is copied, do not throw it away. Endorse it: ‘this page has been left deliberately blank’.
If using colour photographs, do not copy in black and white with the contrast button set at maximum or minimum to reduce clarity.
Plans should not be the tenth copy, where the colour marking has been repeatedly added before copying so in the bundle version the marking obliterates everything else on the plan.
Think of the environment and reuse as many pages as possible from other bundles, but ensure that all the former page numbers are changed to guarantee correct page identification.