MEMBER NEWS: THE BACK CATALOGUE 4: WHY CIVIL PROCEDURE CAN SOMETIMES NOT BE A BUNDLE OF FUN: AND WHY BUNDLES CAN LEAD TO WASTED COSTS ORDERS…

It may surprise people to know how important bundles are to the conduct of civil litigation. It is even more surprising how problematic they can become.  Posts about bundles, and the problems they can present in civil litigation,  have always been a feature of this site. Indeed for the first few years a post on “Sedley’s Laws” on bundles was regularly the most visited post on this site.  Problems with bundles featured in one of the most prominent cases on constitutional law, with the pagination on the judges’ bundles and the advocates’ bundles being 68 pages apart.

Things have not necessarily got better with the advent of electronic bundles, with the “throw everything in” approach regularly being deprecated by the courts. 

Reading a few of these posts will remind practitioners of how important bundles are and the very real dangers of not getting things right.

“WHAT IS THE POINT OF HANDLING A CASE FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS AND THEN FAILING TO PRESENT IT WELL TO THE COURT?”

(Legal Orange – see the post on this here).

FINDING THE POSTS ON BUNDLES

They can be found here.

Some of them are not an easy read.  Here are a selection of the most recent ones.

• THIS CASE …HAS COME BEFORE THIS COURT IN SUCH A DISORDERED AND CHAOTIC STATE THAT IT IS SIMPLY IMPOSSIBLE TO PROCEED IN A FAIR WAY

• A QUICK POST ABOUT BUNDLES: THIS WAS “ALMOST UNUSABLE”: “THE INDEX MUST IDENTIFY THE DOCUMENTS CONTAINED”

• THREE VERSIONS OF A BUNDLE MADE THE HEARING SO UNFAIR AS TO REQUIRE A REHEARING

• LATE AND “HAPHAZARD” SERVICE OF TRIAL BUNDLES LEADS TO WASTED COSTS ORDER AGAINST CLAIMANT’S SOLICITORS (ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS)

• “AN UNWIELDLY COLLECTION OF COURT DOCUMENTS”: A JUDGMENT THAT ENDS THE “BUNDLE DROUGHT”

• A COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE WAY OF PREPARING FOR AN IMPORTANT HEARING”: NON-COMPLIANT AND INCOMPLETE BUNDLES: WITNESS STATEMENTS IMPROPERLY PREPARED

• DELAYS, ADJOURNMENTS AND THE SIZE OF THE TRIAL BUNDLE: NOT JUST AN ACADEMIC PROBLEM: ELECTRONIC BUNDLES DOESN’T MEAN YOU CAN JUST THROW EVERYTHING IN

• “E-MAIL EXCHANGES COULD BE 2,000 OR 4,000 PAGES APART”: A JUDGMENT ABOUT BUNDLES (WHERE YOU CAN SEE SOME FAIRLY GRUMPY CORRESPONDENCE)

SEDLEY’S LAW OF DOCUMENTS

First Law: Documents may be assembled in any order, provided it is not chronological, numerical or alphabetical.

Second Law: Documents shall in no circumstances be paginated continuously.

Third Law: No two copies of any bundle shall have the same pagination.

Fourth Law: Every document shall carry at least three numbers in different places.

Fifth Law: Any important documents shall be omitted.

Sixth Law: At least 10 percent of the documents shall appear more than once in the bundle.

Seventh Law: As many photocopies as practicable shall be illegible, truncated or cropped.

Eighth Law:

1. At least 80 percent of the documents shall be irrelevant.
2. Counsel shall refer in court to no more than 10 percent of the documents, but these may include as many irrelevant ones as counsel or solicitor deems appropriate.

Ninth Law: Only one side of any double-sided document shall be reproduced.

Tenth Law: Transcriptions of manuscript documents shall bear as little relation as reasonably practicable to the original.

Eleventh Law: Documents shall be held together, in the absolute discretion of the solicitor assembling them, by:

1. a steel pin sharp enough to injure the reader,
2. a staple too short to penetrate the full thickness of the bundle.
3. tape binding so stitched that the bundle cannot be fully opened, or,
4. a ring or arch-binder, so damaged that the two arcs do not meet.

WIT AND HUMOUR ARISING OUT OF EXASPERATION?

 There are further and supplemental parts of the Laws that require consideration

Have a look at the Law at http://etclaims.co.uk/2008/09/sedleys-laws-of-documents/  and note the very witty additional comments.  My favourite is

“A further law: If any portion of any document is of particular importance to any issue in the case, that portion shall be highlighted, before copying, in a dark colour so that after copying it is rendered as nearly illegible as is reasonably practicable.”

SOME EARLY POSTS ON BUNDLES

• Trial bundles: Timing, Contents & Presentation: and do you know “Sedley’s Laws” ?
• Troublesome bundles yet again.
• Proportionality, bundles and £3 million spent on costs.
• When bundles & sanctions collide.
• More on Bundles:  there is much time and money to be saved yet.
• Lengthy bundles and interim costs.
• Get bundles and skeletons to court or else.
• Relief from sanctions: Bundles: Expert evidence and litigants in person.
• Costs, proportionality and getting the bundles right.
• “Madness” over costs and useless trial bundles.
• More about trial bundles: Most of the stuff in them is useless (apparently).
• Bundles, appeals and the art of advocacy: Are poor bundles letting down your case?
• Useless Bundles; lengthy skeletons and judicial ire.
• A word about bundles: More views from the Bench.
• Trial Bundles: Another view from the Bench.
• The Importance of Trial Bundles again: Read Legal Orange.
• Yet more on bundles