Eskwai logo
Verify now as a student, judge or newly called lawyer for access to discounted plans.

Cranford Community College v Cranford College Ltd

2014

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ENTERPRISE COURT

United Kingdom

CORAM

  • HIS HONOUR JUDGE HACON

Areas of Law

  • Civil Procedure
  • Intellectual Property Law

AI Generated Summary

At a case management conference in the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (IPEC), His Honour Judge Hacon addressed whether the Civil Procedure Rules require disclosure reports in IPEC. The Claimant sought an unless order to strike out the Defence and enter judgment unless the Defendant served a disclosure report within three days, invoking CPR 31.5(3). The judge reviewed CPR 31.5(2), which generally mandates disclosure reports in multi-track cases, noting that IPEC claims (other than small claims) are multi-track. However, he emphasized that CPR 63.24(2) disapplies the standard disclosure provisions in CPR Part 31 for IPEC and that Practice Direction 63 paragraph 29.1 permits only specific disclosure. Relying also on the White Book note (31.5.1) and CPR 31.5(7)(e), the court concluded CPR 31.5 does not apply in IPEC, so no obligation to serve disclosure reports exists.