BUNDLES, APPEALS AND THE ART OF ADVOCACY: ARE POOR BUNDLES LETTING DOWN YOUR CASE?

July 14, 2014 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Written advocacy

The recent post on Caldero Trading -v- Leibson [2014] EWCA Civ 935 included the Court of Appeal's criticism of the voluminous bundles prepared in that case. The trial bundle is often neglected as a tool for advocacy. THIS DOES MEAN THAT A BUNDLE SHOULD BE ADVERSARIAL? Exactly the opposite. A trial,...

Enjoying this post?

Become a Civil Litigation Brief member to read full articles and access all premium content.

Become a member

Already a member? Log in below

Tags: Civil Procedure Rules, Court order, Trial bundles

2 Responses

Paul Sachs · July 15, 2014 at 06:58:06 · →

Electronic bundles are changing a part of this scene. When a judge complains about the size of the bundle he is really complaining about the logistics of finding an individual page in the bundle. The issues are physical: space on the bench, weight of the bundle (when carried by the clerk of court or home by the judge), identification of a bundle page and speed of moving from one page to the next.

Electronic bundles greatly mitigate these factors. I wold suggest that the size of a bundle may not be of concern to a judge if presented electronically with the right facilities.

Take a look (10 minute video): http://youtu.be/7r8RUwORvkc
R Gregory · July 15, 2014 at 08:23:21 · →

It is interesting that the court consider it ‘remarkable’ that the presentation of trial bundles is left to the lowest grade fee earner or admin staff when the MOJ cost budgeting guidelines explicitly state that assembling the bundles is not fee earners’ work. Whilst clearly this may be the case for copying the bundles, surely for the preparation/ assembly of the bundles it is not so clear cut when decisions have to be made as to the relevance and inclusion of documents.