Cutts, Tatiana (2021) Names, notice and the demands of due process. Civil Justice Quarterly, 40 (1). 18 - 40. ISSN 0261-9261
Text (Names, notice and the demands of due process)
- Accepted Version
Download (378kB) |
Abstract
Our apex court has recently given renewed support for a general rule that requires the claimant to name her defendant at the outset of a civil action; exceptionally, she may prove that the defendant will discover the proceedings in the process of enforcing an ensuing court order. The purpose of this article is to consider the justification for a general identification threshold, and to develop a corresponding blueprint for this part of our procedural framework. I argue that the role of procedural identification is two-fold: first, it serves the distributive goal of ensuring that judicial resources are not directed towards fruitless actions; second, it serves the corrective goal of ensuring that the defendant can participate in the decision-making process through which her adversary seeks redress, which is a crucial aspect of the law’s commitment to procedural fairness. I argue that we should distinguish two kinds of case, which correspond to these goals: if the efficacy of the order sought depends upon provision of the defendant’s name, the claimant should be required to provide a name; if it does not, the claimant should be required to prove – whether or not she can name her defendant – that she can give notice.
Item Type: | Article |
---|---|
Official URL: | https://uk.westlaw.com/WestlawUk/Journals/Publicat... |
Additional Information: | © 2020 Thomson Reuters |
Divisions: | Law |
Subjects: | K Law |
Date Deposited: | 04 May 2020 15:15 |
Last Modified: | 12 Dec 2024 02:08 |
URI: | http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/id/eprint/104236 |
Actions (login required)
View Item |