Civil Procedure Rules and the Dilapidations Protocol

A feature introduced by the CPR is the need for many documents in litigation to carry what is known as a statement of truth (see Part 22 CPR). A statement of truth is not the same as the endorsement referred to in the Dilapidations Protocol (section 3.5 and 3.6), but see also the Dilapidations guidance note (7th edition) (section 8.4).

A statement of truth is an assertion by the person signing the document concerned that the facts set out in it are true. The sanction for signing a statement of truth in circumstances where the signatory did not have an honest belief in the truth of the facts set out in the document concerned is, ultimately, imprisonment, because the issue could give rise to an assertion that there has been a contempt of court.

In most landlord and tenant disputes, the statement of truth does not give rise to any difficulty because the facts referred to in the document will be uncontroversial. So, for example the ‘fact’ referred to in the document might be that there is a lease and its terms are those set out in the document.

The statement of truth will not generally ‘bite’ in relation to expressions of opinion, for example, that the landlord’s claim for damages is put at £x or that the damage to reversionary interest of the landlord is put at £y. But of course, if the opinion is being expressed by an expert, there will be other duties to adhere to, both under the CPR Part 35 and the RICS practice statement and guidance note Surveyors acting as expert witnesses.

However, in the context of a claim for dilapidations, the statement could be of significance in cases where, say, the landlord has to assert its position as to intention for the building, for example, ‘The landlord does not intend to redevelop the property or carry out any works that would render unnecessary any works of repair that should have been carried out by the tenant.’ If it were proved that the landlord did in fact have such an intention (perhaps because its file has been disclosed and there is evidence on it of such an intention and no evidence of an honest change of mind) and that the signatory knew that to be the case, the signatory could be exposed to a claim that there has been a contempt of court.

Therefore, great care needs to be taken over the preparation of any document that might be required to bear a statement of truth so that the signatory can sign it with some peace of mind.