In a claim in tort, is the defendant not entitled to put the claimant to proof without pleading a positive case for the defence without judgment being entered against him on allocation?
In a claim in tort, is the defendant not entitled to put the claimant to proof without pleading a positive case for the defence without judgment being entered against him on allocation?
The aim of the CPR was to do away with bare denials. CPR 16 expressly states that where the defendant denies an allegation he must state his reasons for doing so and, if he intends to put forward a different version of events from that given by the claimant, he must state his own version.
The defendant may be the Motor Insurers Bureau or a Road Traffic Act insurer which only has the claimant’s version of events on which to rely and effectively wants to put the claimant to proof. The court may permit it to do so: it may not. It will depend on the strength of the evidence: does the defendant have a real prospect of successfully defending?
