The Civil Procedure Rules govern the conduct of civil litigation in England and Wales. They provide the procedural framework for cases in the High Court and County Court, covering everything from issuing proceedings to enforcement of judgment.
The Civil Procedure Rules apply to civil proceedings in the High Court and County Court in England and Wales and do not extend to Scotland or Northern Ireland, which operate under separate procedural systems.
The civil procedure rules are not merely technical guidance. They shape access to justice, litigation costs, case management, and procedural fairness. Understanding how the CPR operates both historically and in practice is essential for litigants and practitioners alike.
The history of the civil procedure rules
The civil procedure rules were introduced following Lord Woolf’s “Access to Justice” reports in the mid-1990s. Before their introduction, civil litigation was governed by two separate systems: the Rules of the Supreme Court and the County Court Rules. These parallel regimes were widely criticised for complexity, delay, and high cost.
The Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (SI 1998/3132) came into force in April 1999, replacing the previous fragmented system with a unified procedural code.
Official legislation:
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1998/3132/contents/made
A central innovation of the CPR was the introduction of the overriding objective, requiring courts to deal with cases justly and at proportionate cost. This marked a shift from purely party-driven litigation towards active judicial case management.
Since 1999, the civil procedure rules have evolved significantly. Reforms have strengthened case management powers, refined the Part 36 settlement regime, modernised disclosure requirements (including electronic disclosure), and expanded fixed recoverable costs under CPR 45. The CPR continues to adapt in response to digitalisation and procedural reform.
The overriding objective
The overriding objective is set out in CPR Part 1 and forms the foundation of the civil procedure rules. It requires the court to deal with cases justly and at proportionate cost. This principle governs the interpretation and application of every procedural rule within the CPR framework.
Official CPR Part 1:
https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part01
Dealing with a case justly includes ensuring that the parties are on an equal footing, saving expense, resolving disputes expeditiously and fairly, and allocating an appropriate share of the court’s resources to each case. Proportionality lies at the heart of the modern civil justice system and reflects the cultural shift introduced by the Civil Procedure Rules 1998.
Importantly, the duty to further the overriding objective is not confined to the court. All parties and their legal representatives are required to assist the court in achieving it. This shared responsibility underpins active case management and reinforces the expectation that litigation should be conducted efficiently and cooperatively.
Civil procedure rules part 8: Alternative procedure
Civil procedure rules Part 8 provides an alternative procedure where there is unlikely to be a substantial dispute of fact. It is commonly used in judicial review proceedings, certain trust disputes, and applications seeking declaratory relief.
Official CPR Part 8:
https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part08
Unlike the standard Part 7 procedure, Part 8 relies primarily on written evidence and typically proceeds without extensive pleadings or disclosure. It is designed for cases where legal interpretation rather than factual dispute is central.
Civil procedure rules pre-action protocol
The civil procedure rules pre-action protocol framework requires parties to exchange information before proceedings are issued. Pre-action conduct aims to encourage early settlement, clarify issues in dispute, and reduce unnecessary litigation.
Practice Direction – Pre-Action Conduct:
https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/pd_pre-action_conduct
Failure to comply with a relevant pre-action protocol may result in adverse costs consequences. The emphasis on early communication reflects the CPR’s broader commitment to proportionality and efficient dispute resolution.
Part 35 civil procedure rules: expert evidence
Part 35 civil procedure rules govern the use of expert evidence in civil proceedings.
Official CPR Part 35:
https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part35
Under CPR Part 35, experts owe an overriding duty to the court rather than to the party instructing them. Permission is generally required before expert evidence can be relied upon, and the court may direct the appointment of a single joint expert.
Expert evidence frequently plays a decisive role in professional negligence, medical, engineering and construction disputes. The CPR framework ensures that such evidence is independent and proportionate.
Part 36 civil procedure rules: settlement offers
Part 36 civil procedure rules create a structured regime for settlement offers with significant cost consequences.
Official CPR Part 36:
https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part36
Part 36 is designed to encourage parties to settle disputes without the need for trial. A party that fails to obtain a judgment more advantageous than a Part 36 offer may face serious cost consequences, including adverse costs orders and enhanced interest. Conversely, a party that beats its own Part 36 offer may be entitled to indemnity costs, enhanced interest, and additional amounts under the rule.
The structured and prescriptive nature of Part 36 reflects the wider policy of the Civil Procedure Rules: promoting early settlement, reducing unnecessary litigation, and ensuring that costs remain proportionate to the issues in dispute.
Civil procedure rules 31.6: disclosure
Civil procedure rule 31.6 defines the scope of standard disclosure.
Official CPR Part 31:
https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part31
Under CPR 31.6, parties must disclose documents on which they rely, which adversely affect their own case, which adversely affect another party’s case, or which support another party’s case. Disclosure is fundamental to procedural fairness and transparency.
Recent reforms, including Practice Direction 57AD (Disclosure in the Business and Property Courts), have modernised electronic disclosure obligations.
Civil procedure rules 45: Fixed recoverable costs
Civil procedure rules 45 govern fixed recoverable costs in specified categories of civil claims. In recent years, the scope of fixed costs has expanded significantly, particularly in lower-value disputes.
The fixed costs regime limits the amount a successful party can recover from the opposing party, regardless of the actual legal costs incurred. This framework promotes certainty and proportionality, while also reducing disputes over detailed cost assessment.
Following recent reforms, CPR 45 now plays a central role in litigation strategy and risk evaluation. Practitioners must carefully assess whether a claim falls within the fixed recoverable costs regime, as this can materially affect funding decisions and settlement strategy.
Case management and sanctions under the civil procedure rules
One of the defining features of the civil procedure rules is active judicial case management. Under CPR Part 3, the court has wide powers to control proceedings, including setting timetables, limiting evidence, striking out statements of case, and imposing sanctions for procedural non-compliance.
This approach reflects the broader objective of ensuring that litigation is conducted efficiently and proportionately. Failure to comply with rules or court orders may result in serious consequences, including costs, penalties, or refusal of relief from sanctions.
The decisions in Mitchell v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Denton v TH White Ltd illustrate the courts’ structured approach to procedural default. While the courts aim to avoid injustice, they also emphasise that compliance with the civil procedure rules is not optional. Procedural discipline is central to the modern civil justice system.
Abuse of process under the civil procedure rules
The doctrine of abuse of process operates alongside CPR 3.4, allowing the court to strike out claims where proceedings are vexatious, duplicative, or constitute an attempt to relitigate issues already determined.
In Johnson v Gore Wood & Co [2002] 2 AC 1, the House of Lords confirmed that the court must prevent misuse of its procedures in order to protect the integrity of the justice system. Abuse of process principles reinforces the finality of litigation and ensures that court resources are not wasted.
This power reflects the broader structure of the civil procedure rules, which balance access to justice with the need for efficiency and fairness.
Why the civil procedure rules continue to matter
More than two decades after their introduction, the civil procedure rules remain central to the operation of civil justice in England and Wales. They govern not only how claims are issued and defended, but how evidence is managed, how disputes are settled, and how costs and consequences are determined.
From expert evidence under Part 35 to settlement strategy under Part 36, from disclosure obligations under CPR 31.6 to fixed costs under CPR 45, the CPR shapes every stage of civil litigation. Their emphasis on proportionality, efficiency, and judicial control reflects a continuing effort to balance fairness with practical resource constraints.
For practitioners, a detailed understanding of the civil procedure rules is indispensable. For litigants, awareness of the CPR framework can prevent costly procedural missteps. The CPR is not a static technical provision; it is the procedural architecture of civil justice in England and Wales.
