The High Court has ruled on vague points of dispute. Amy Dunkley reports
- In Ward v Rai, the High Court has overturned a decision to let a non-compliant point of dispute stand, meaning the receiving party could not rely on a more detailed schedule that had been served only two working days before the detailed assessment hearing.
- Practitioners should ensure that points of dispute contain sufficient particularisation for the receiving party to work out what is in dispute and why.
The judgment in Ward v Rai [2025] EWHC 1681 (KB) is the latest in a receiving party’s arsenal against points of dispute that are too vague. It follows the decisions in Wazen v Khan [2024] EWHC 1083 (SCCO) and St Francis Group 1 Ltd & Ors v Kelly & Anor [2025] EWHC 125 (SCCO), which confirmed that the judgment in Ainsworth v Stewarts Law LLP [2020] EWCA Civ 178 applied to detailed assessments between the parties.
The legal framework
Points of dispute must comply with CPR PD 47, para 8.2. Specifically, they must be short and to the
