The Civil Procedure (Amendment No. 2) Rules 2025
The Civil Procedure (Amendment No. 2) Rules 2025 amend the Civil Procedure Rules 1998, primarily to integrate electronic filing and case management systems and to accommodate recent legislative changes.
Specific changes include updates to rules concerning time limits (rule 2.8), filing and sending documents (rule 5.5), alternative procedure for claims (Part 8), competition law claims (rule 30.8), costs assessment (rule 44.6), adding parties to proceedings (rule 46.2), appeals (Part 52), hearings (rule 62.10), and closed material proceedings (Part 82).
The amendments aim for enhanced efficiency, clarity, and accessibility within the civil justice system.
Arguments For
Improved Efficiency and Modernization: The amendments aim to streamline civil procedures, particularly through the integration of electronic filing systems, leading to faster and more efficient case management.
Enhanced Accessibility and Inclusivity: Modernizing the system with electronic filing and case management improves accessibility for all parties.
Addressing Gaps in Existing Legislation: The changes adapt the rules to accommodate new legislation, such as the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024, and the Arbitration Act 2025, ensuring consistency and legal clarity.
Clarification and Consistency: Several amendments clarify ambiguous points or inconsistencies in the Civil Procedure Rules 1998, contributing to clearer understanding and application of the rules.
Increased Flexibility in Cost Assessment: Allowing a different judge to handle summary cost assessments enhances efficiency in some cases.
Improved Fairness in Closed Material Proceedings: Allowing a special advocate to communicate with a specially represented party, where appropriate, could enhance fairness and due process in such proceedings.
Arguments Against
Unintended Consequences: The extensive changes could unearth unforeseen complexities or inconsistencies despite comprehensive review. Thorough testing of the amended rules is critical.
Implementation Challenges: Transitioning to electronic filing systems may pose challenges for those unfamiliar with technology, potentially creating disparities in access to justice for some individuals. Training and support are necessary for smooth transition.
Cost of Implementation: Implementing new systems and procedures might incur expenses for the courts and litigants. A cost-benefit analysis would show the gains from this in comparison.
Potential Delays: Implementing extensive changes to rules could lead to initial confusion and potential delays in proceedings as participants adapt to the new systems and processes. The implementation strategy must be meticulous.
Overly Complex Amendments: The changes increase the complexity of the Civil Procedure Rules, potentially increasing difficulties for self-represented litigants to navigate the system.
- Citation, commencement and interpretation (1) These Rules may be cited as the Civil Procedure (Amendment No. 2) Rules 2025 and come into force in accordance with paragraph (2). (2) These Rules come into force as follows— (a) rules 1, 2 and 11 come into force on 12th September 2025; and (b) rules 3 to 10 come into force on 1st October 2025. (3) In these Rules a reference to a Part or rule by number alone means the Part or rule so numbered in the Civil Procedure Rules 1998.
This section establishes the title of the new rules as the Civil Procedure (Amendment No. 2) Rules 2025.
It specifies the effective dates for different rule components: rules 1, 2, and 11 come into effect September 12th, 2025, while rules 3 to 10 become effective October 1st, 2025.
Finally, it clarifies that when a rule is referenced by number only, it refers to the corresponding rule in the Civil Procedure Rules 1998.
- Amendments to the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 The Civil Procedure Rules 1998 are amended in accordance with rules 3 to 11 of these Rules.
This section is brief and simply states that the subsequent rules (3-11) detail amendments to the Civil Procedure Rules 1998.
- Amendment of Part 2 In rule 2.8(5), in the opening words, for “Subject to the provisions of Practice Direction 5C, when” substitute “When”.
This rule amends rule 2.8(5) of Part 2 of the 1998 rules by removing a reference to Practice Direction 5C (related to electronic filing).
This simplifies the wording and possibly reflects the integration of the Practice Direction into the rules themselves.
- Amendment of Part 5 In rule 5.5— (a) in paragraph (1)(a) for “facsimile” substitute “the use of an electronic filing and case management system”; and (b) in paragraph (2)— (i) in sub-paragraph (b), at the end; omit “and”; (ii) in sub-paragraph (c), at the end, for “.” substitute “;”; and (iii) after sub-paragraph (c) insert— (d) modify or disapply any provision of these rules in relation to the use of any court electronic filing and case management system.
This section modifies rule 5.5 of Part 5 which governs filing and sending documents.
Subsection (a) replaces "facsimile" with "the use of an electronic filing and case management system," updating the language to reflect modern practice. Subsections (b)(i) and (b)(ii) are grammatical corrections.
Subsection (b)(iii) adds a new sub-paragraph (d) that empowers the court to adjust or bypass rules for electronic filing and case management.
- Amendment of Part 8 (1) In rule 8.2— (a) before “Where the claimant”, insert “(1)”; (b) after the first set of parentheses that follow sub-paragraph (e), insert— (2) Except where another rule or practice direction applies, rule 7.5 and rule 7.6 shall apply with regard to the service of the claim form; and (c) omit “(Rule 7.5 provides for service of the claim form). (2) In rule 8.5— (a) in paragraph (3), after “acknowledgement of service” insert “unless the defendant has indicated on their acknowledgement of service an intention to contest jurisdiction, in which case the evidence must be filed within fourteen days of filing the acknowledgment of service if no such application is made”; and (b) in paragraph (4), for “they do so” substitute “a defendant files their evidence”.
This section amends Part 8, detailing modifications to rules governing alternative claim procedures.
Rule 8.2 is altered to clarify the numbering and to ensure that the rules regarding service of a claim form are consistently and explicitly applied.
Rule 8.5 is updated to provide more precise instructions on filing evidence, particularly relating to timescales when jurisdiction is contested and not challenged via a formal application.
- Amendment of Part 30 In rule 30.8(1), after “Competition Act 1998” insert “or to a claim under section 101 of the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024”.
This rule amends rule 30.8(1) (which deals with transferring competition law claims) to include claims under section 101 of the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024.
This ensures that it keeps pace with new legislation.
- Amendment of Part 44 (1) In rule 44.1(1), in the definition of “summary assessment”— (a) for “heard” substitute “decided”; and (b) after “or application” insert “or where rule 44.6(2) applies. (2) In rule 44.6— (a) in paragraph (1)— (i) in the opening words, omit “either”; (ii) in sub-paragraph (a), at the end, omit “or”; (iii) after sub-paragraph (a) insert— (b) give directions for the summary assessment of the costs to be made at a later date; or; and (iv) renumber what is currently sub-paragraph (b) as sub-paragraph (c); (b) after the words in parenthesis which immediately follow paragraph (1), insert— (2) Where a direction has been given under paragraph (1)(b), another judge who could have decided the claim or application which gave rise to the costs order may make the summary assessment if there is good reason to do so; and (c) renumber what is currently paragraph (2) as paragraph (3).
This section updates Part 44, which addresses the procedure for assessing costs.
The amendments clarify the definition of "summary assessment" in rule 44.1, and rule 44.6 is revised to allow greater flexibility in scheduling and assigning judges for cost assessments, particularly those not decided at the hearing conclusion.
- Amendment of Part 46 In rule 46.2, after paragraph (2) insert— (3) Neither rule 19.4 nor rule 20.7 applies to the joinder of a person under paragraph (1).
This amendment to Part 46 (costs orders involving non-parties) adds a new paragraph (3) to rule 46.2.
This clarifies that standard procedures for adding or substituting parties (rules 19.4 and 20.7) do not apply when a party is added solely for cost-related reasons in the proceedings.
- Amendment of Part 52 (1) In rule 52.8(1), after “section 18(1)” omit “(a). (2) In rule 52.12(3)— (a) in the opening words, for “an appellant’s” substitute “a sealed copy of the appellant’s”; (b) in sub-paragraph (b)— (i) after “in any event” insert “where it is served by the appellant”; and (ii) for “7” substitute “14”; and (c) in the full out, for “filed” substitute “sealed”.
This section contains amendments to Part 52, which pertains to appeals.
Minor changes clarify the wording of rule 52.8(1) to improve readability, and in rule 52.12(3) it clarifies and adjusts the timing and format requirements for serving appeals notices, by altering the required timing from 7 days to 14 days to complete the process.
- Amendment of Part 62 In rule 62.10(4) omit sub-paragraph (a).
This rule removes sub-paragraph (a) from rule 62.10(4).
This pertains to procedural matters relating to hearings, and the removal presumably reflects it is no longer relevant, due to amendment elsewhere.
- Amendment of Part 82 (1) In rule 82.11— (a) in paragraph (2), after “paragraph (3)” insert “(3A)”; (b) after paragraph (3) insert— (3A) The special advocate may communicate with the specially represented party or the specially represented party’s legal representative with the express agreement of the relevant person and (where the relevant person is not the Secretary of State) the Secretary of State; and (c) in paragraph (6)(b), after “in accordance with” insert “paragraph (3A) or”. (2) In rule 82.23, after paragraph (1) insert— (1A) If the court considers that it is necessary before it can determine whether to make a declaration under section 6(2) of the Act, it may, on application or of its own motion, direct the relevant person to file— (a) a draft response document, addressing the matters directed by the court (“a draft closed summary”); or (b) having first considered whether a draft closed summary is sufficient to determine the matter, a defence or response, as appropriate, to one or more of the grounds identified in the claim, together with such further directions as to its content as the court considers appropriate (“a draft closed defence”); (1B) A draft closed summary or a draft closed defence— (a) shall be disclosed to— (i) the court; (ii) any person appointed as a special advocate; or (iii) where the Secretary of State is not the relevant person but is a party to the proceedings, the Secretary of State, but must not be disclosed otherwise; and (b) shall not be relied upon other than in determining whether to make a declaration under section 6(2) of the Act. (1C) A draft closed defence is not a statement of case.
This rule makes significant changes to Part 82, addressing closed material proceedings.
The amendments provide changes to communication guidelines for special advocates.
Modifications are also made to establish procedures for reviewing and filing documents, allowing flexibility in court directions to address necessary information before deciding on declarations under section 6(2) of the Justice and Security Act 2013.
New subsections specify conditions around sharing sensitive material and emphasize that certain documents should only be used to make specified decisions.