Case management - Track allocation

Learning Outcomes

This article outlines track allocation within the civil litigation framework in England and Wales, including:

• the procedural stages from defence to final allocation, with emphasis on the Notice of Proposed Allocation and completion of the Directions Questionnaire;
• the criteria for assigning claims to the Small Claims Track, Fast Track, or Multi-Track, and how the court applies the overriding objective and CPR 26.8 when making that decision;
• the main procedural features, cost consequences, and evidential limits of each track, focusing on disclosure, expert evidence, trial length, and costs control mechanisms;
• the court’s powers to hold allocation hearings, to order early neutral evaluation, and to reallocate cases where value, complexity, or party circumstances change;
• worked examples illustrating borderline allocation scenarios, special personal injury and housing disrepair thresholds, and common pitfalls that frequently feature in SQE1-style questions;
• guidance on interpreting exam fact patterns to identify the correct track, justify allocation, and spot reallocation triggers.

SQE1 Syllabus

For SQE1, you are required to understand the court's case management role, particularly how cases are allocated to the appropriate track to ensure they are dealt with justly and at proportionate cost. Your knowledge should cover the criteria for allocation and the key procedural features associated with each track, with a focus on the following syllabus points:

• The overriding objective's role in case management and track allocation.
• The criteria used by the court to allocate claims to the Small Claims Track, Fast Track, and Multi-Track (CPR Part 26).
• The main procedural differences and cost implications associated with each track (CPR Parts 27, 28, and 29).
• The function and importance of the Directions Questionnaire in the allocation process.
• The court's power to reallocate a claim if circumstances change.
• The typical fast track timetable and restrictions on oral expert evidence, including the use of single joint experts.
• Special small claims thresholds for personal injury and housing disrepair, including the higher PSLA threshold for RTA-related personal injury claims.
• The role of costs budgeting on the Multi-Track and the use of disclosure reports and tailored disclosure orders.

Test Your Knowledge

Attempt these questions before reading this article. If you find some difficult or cannot remember the answers, remember to look more closely at that area during your revision.

1. A claimant issues a claim for breach of contract valued at £18,000. The facts are straightforward, and the trial is estimated to last one day. Which track is the court most likely to allocate this claim to?
   1. Small Claims Track
   2. Fast Track
   3. Multi-Track
   4. Specialist List
2. Which of the following factors will the court generally disregard when assessing the financial value of a claim for track allocation purposes under CPR 26.8(2)? (Select all that apply)
   1. Claim complexity
   2. Claimed interest
   3. Costs of the litigation
   4. Value of any counterclaim
   5. Any amount admitted by the defendant
3. What is the primary purpose of the Directions Questionnaire (Form N181) in the context of track allocation?
   1. To settle the claim before allocation.
   2. To provide the court with information to allocate the claim to the correct track and manage the case.
   3. To detail the final costs budget for the entire case.
   4. To serve as the primary evidence document for the trial.

Introduction

Once a defence is filed in civil proceedings, the court takes an active role in managing the case. An essential early step in this process is track allocation. This involves assigning the case to one of three procedural pathways – the Small Claims Track, the Fast Track, or the Multi-Track – each designed to handle cases of differing value and complexity. The allocation decision significantly influences the procedure, timetable, costs, and overall management of the claim moving forward. Track allocation supports proportionate case management in line with the overriding objective and is governed primarily by Part 26 of the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR). The court may tailor subsequent directions and, where appropriate, will encourage settlement and alternative dispute resolution to further the overriding objective.

Key Term: Overriding Objective
The guiding principle in CPR 1.1 requiring the court to deal with cases justly and at proportionate cost, including ensuring equal footing, saving expense, proportionality, expedition, appropriate use of court resources, and enforcing compliance.

The Allocation Process

When a defendant files a defence, the court provisionally decides which track appears most appropriate based largely on the information in the statements of case, particularly the claim's financial value. The court also considers any early applications (e.g., for summary judgment or interim injunctions) and whether pre-action steps were properly followed. In practice, defended County Court claims are transferred to the defendant’s local hearing centre unless there are reasons to hear them elsewhere (CPR 26.2), and any later allocation hearing will be listed at the appropriate court.

Notice of Proposed Allocation

The court serves a Notice of Proposed Allocation on all parties (CPR 26.3). This notice indicates the court's provisional view on the appropriate track and requires the parties to file a completed Directions Questionnaire by a specified date. For cases provisionally allocated to the Fast Track or Multi-Track, the notice often also requires proposed directions. For Multi-Track, parties should be prepared to address costs management and disclosure at an early stage.

Key Term: Notice of Proposed Allocation
A court notice sent to parties after a defence is filed, indicating the track the court thinks is most suitable for the claim and requiring the parties to complete a Directions Questionnaire.

The notice typically sets a deadline of around 28 days for filing the questionnaire, and the court may refuse to extend this period unless there is good reason. If the claim is not a money claim, directions for further steps may accompany the notice. Parties should note the specified hearing centre and any requirement to file documents at a court different from the issuing court.

Key Term: Allocation Hearing
A short hearing at which the judge considers the proper track, clarifies case management issues, and may give directions. The court lists such a hearing if the papers are insufficient or parties disagree sharply about allocation.

Directions Questionnaire

The Directions Questionnaire (often Form N181 for Fast Track and Multi-Track cases) is a key document. It gathers information from the parties to help the court make a final allocation decision and to manage the case effectively. Each party is expected to consult the other to agree proposed directions where possible and give realistic time estimates and witness/expert needs.

Key Term: Directions Questionnaire
A form completed by parties providing the court with information relevant to case management, including views on track allocation, evidence, witnesses, experts, and proposed directions.

Parties must complete and return the questionnaire by the date specified in the Notice of Proposed Allocation (usually within 28 days). Failure to do so can lead to sanctions, including the striking out of a statement of case (CPR 26.3(8)). Parties are encouraged to cooperate and, where possible, agree on proposed directions before filing the questionnaire.

For Fast Track and Multi-Track, Form N181 is divided into ten parts (A–J). Typical content includes:

• Settlement: Whether a stay is sought for ADR. The court may grant a stay even if not all parties agree, and a party refusing ADR may face costs consequences.
• Court: Reasons for a particular hearing centre (e.g., witnesses’ location or specialist list suitability).
• Pre-action protocols: Confirmation of compliance and reasons for any non-compliance. Non-compliance may attract directions and potential costs orders.
• Case management information: Any applications made or intended, objections to provisional allocation, and proposals for disclosure including electronic documents.
• Experts: Whether a single joint expert is suitable, expert disciplines required, and estimated expert costs. Fast Track cases seldom permit more than one expert per party per field.
• Witnesses: Number and scope of witnesses of fact, identifying issues to be covered.
• Trial: A realistic estimate of trial length (Fast Track trials are limited to one day – typically up to five hours).
• Costs: For Multi-Track, parties must file costs budgets (CPR 3.12–3.14) and attempt budget discussion reports. Fast Track cases do not generally require costs budgets.
• Other information: Any other matters assisting case management, such as disclosure issues, proposed split trials, or anticipated amendments.
• Directions: Proposed directions, ideally agreed. Fast Track directions usually follow the standard timetable; Multi-Track directions are tailored and often based on specimen directions.

For Multi-Track, additional case management documents are typically required:

• A concise case summary and/or list of issues to assist at a Case Management Conference.
• A disclosure report and proposals for managing disclosure proportionately (CPR 31.5).
• Costs budgets and budget discussion reports, except where costs management is exempt.
• A draft order for directions.

Key Term: Pre-Trial Checklist
A court form (listing questionnaire) issued before trial requiring parties to confirm readiness, compliance with directions, and any outstanding issues. In Fast Track, it is commonly sent about 20 weeks after allocation.

Key Term: Single Joint Expert
An expert instructed jointly by parties to give independent opinion evidence. Particularly common in Fast Track to limit cost and avoid duplication.

Criteria for Allocation (CPR 26.8)

The court allocates a claim to a track based on several factors outlined in CPR 26.8. While financial value is often the starting point, the court must consider all relevant circumstances.

Financial Value

Financial value is a primary indicator, but not the sole determinant. The general financial limits are:

• Small Claims Track: Claims with a financial value not exceeding £10,000 (CPR 26.6(3)). Lower limits apply to personal injury and housing disrepair. For personal injury claims other than those arising from road traffic accidents, the value of PSLA must not exceed £1,000 to fall within Small Claims. For RTA-related personal injury claims arising after 31 May 2021, the PSLA threshold is higher (generally £5,000) and many such claims are processed through the Official Injury Claim (OIC) portal; vulnerability categories and certain exclusions apply in practice. Housing disrepair claims concerning repairs are normally Small Claims where the estimated cost of repairs does not exceed £1,000, and any damages component is low.
• Fast Track: Claims valued between £10,001 and £25,000, provided the trial is unlikely to exceed one day and oral expert evidence is limited (CPR 26.6(4)-(5)).
• Multi-Track: Claims valued over £25,000, or lower value claims unsuitable for the Small Claims or Fast Tracks due to complexity (CPR 26.6(6)).

When assessing financial value for allocation, the court disregards amounts not in dispute, interest, costs, and any potential reduction for contributory negligence (CPR 26.8(2)). Where there are multiple claims (e.g., a counterclaim), the court generally does not aggregate values; the largest claim typically determines financial value for allocation (PD 26).

Other Factors (CPR 26.8(1))

Beyond financial value, the court considers:

• The nature of the remedy sought (e.g., injunctions or declarations may indicate Multi-Track).
• The likely complexity of facts, law, or evidence, including whether expert evidence spans multiple fields.
• The number of parties or likely parties, and any multi-party or group characteristics.
• The value and complexity of any counterclaim or Part 20 claim.
• The amount of oral evidence required (number of factual witnesses and expert evidence).
• The importance of the claim to non-parties or the public (e.g., precedent-setting points).
• The views expressed by the parties in their Directions Questionnaires.
• The circumstances of the parties, including whether a litigant in person is involved and any particular needs affecting case management.

The court may list an allocation hearing if paper consideration is insufficient, and can direct an early neutral evaluation to assist settlement.

Worked Example 1.1

A claim for breach of contract is issued for £22,000. The legal issues are complex, involving interpretation of technical clauses and requiring evidence from three expert witnesses per side. The trial is estimated to last three days. Which track is most likely?

Answer:
Although the financial value (£22,000) falls within the Fast Track range, the complexity, need for multiple experts, and estimated trial length (exceeding one day) make it unsuitable for the Fast Track. The court is most likely to allocate this claim to the Multi-Track under CPR 26.6(6) due to these factors.

The Three Tracks

Each track has distinct procedural characteristics tailored to the types of cases it handles.

Small Claims Track (CPR Part 27)

This track offers a simplified and less formal procedure for low-value claims. It is designed so that litigants can often represent themselves effectively.

• Procedure: Relaxed rules of evidence, often dealt with without extensive pre-hearing preparation. The court will give simple directions such as exchanging copies of documents on which parties intend to rely at least 14 days before the hearing and bringing originals to court. Expert evidence requires express permission and may be by report only.
• Costs: Generally, only limited fixed costs are recoverable (CPR 27.14). Recoverable items are tightly controlled and often include fixed issue costs and reasonable travel/witness expenses. Expert fees are capped at a modest level (commonly up to £750) unless the court orders otherwise. Costs can be awarded more generously where a party has behaved unreasonably.
• Suitability: Consumer disputes, minor accident claims, straightforward debt recovery, and landlord-tenant disputes concerning minor repairs. Cases involving disputed dishonesty are usually unsuitable (PD 26, para 8.1). RTA-related PI claims frequently fall here if the PSLA component is within the higher threshold for such cases and the overall value is modest.

Key Term: Early Neutral Evaluation
A non-binding evaluation by a judge intended to assist settlement. The court may order ENE as part of active case management to further the overriding objective.

Fast Track (CPR Part 28)

Designed for moderately valued claims (£10,001 - £25,000) that are capable of being tried within a day.

• Procedure: Managed via standard directions and a fixed timetable. The court will usually set a timetable aiming for trial within about 30 weeks of allocation. Typical steps include:
  • Disclosure in about 4 weeks from allocation, followed by inspection;
  • Exchange of witness statements by around 10 weeks;
  • Exchange of experts’ reports by around 14 weeks;
  • Pre-trial checklists issued about 20 weeks, returned by around 22 weeks;
  • Trial around week 30. The court may vary or omit steps where they have already occurred or are unnecessary. Parties can agree in writing to vary certain step dates by consent, but not the trial date nor the date for filing pre-trial checklists without court approval.
• Trial: Limited to one day (maximum five hours). Witness statements stand as evidence-in-chief. Oral expert evidence is restricted (usually one expert per party per field and no more than two expert fields).
• Costs: Costs are subject to fixed limits for the trial advocacy fees and often summary assessment at the end of trial. The court keeps costs proportionate to value and issues. Costs budgets are not generally required on the Fast Track, and fixed recoverable costs may apply in certain categories (e.g., RTA, employers’ liability).

Multi-Track (CPR Part 29)

This is the track for higher-value (over £25,000) and complex claims falling outside the scope of the other two tracks.

• Procedure: Flexible case management tailored to the specific needs of the case. Directions are often set at one or more Case Management Conferences (CMCs). The court may also list a Pre-Trial Review for complex trials spanning multiple days. Orders commonly address disclosure scope via standard or bespoke “menu” options, expert evidence (including hot-tubbing or concurrent evidence where appropriate), split trials (e.g., liability/quantum), and timetabling that reflects actual complexity.
• Evidence: Allows for more extensive disclosure (including e-disclosure), multiple witnesses, and detailed expert evidence management. Parties must file disclosure reports and proposals (CPR 31.5), and the court orders tailored disclosure (from dispensing with disclosure altogether to issue-based or staged disclosure).
• Costs: Costs budgeting usually applies (CPR 3.12), requiring parties to file and exchange budgets and attempt to agree budget discussion reports. The court will manage costs to ensure proportionality. Costs are generally subject to detailed assessment after trial unless summarily assessed at an interim stage.

Key Term: Case Management Conference (CMC)
A hearing, typically on the Multi-Track, where a judge gives directions for the management of the case, sets timetables, and deals with issues like disclosure, evidence, and costs budgeting.

Key Term: Costs Budget
A formal estimate of future litigation costs filed and exchanged in Multi-Track cases (subject to exceptions), which the court approves and uses to manage costs proportionately.

Key Term: Disclosure Report
A report filed before the first CMC in Multi-Track cases setting out the party’s document holdings, proposed scope of disclosure, and costs of different disclosure options, to enable proportionate disclosure orders.

Worked Example 1.2

A personal injury claim involves complex medical evidence from multiple specialists (neurology, orthopaedics, psychiatry). The value for PSLA is estimated at £40,000, with significant claims for future care and loss of earnings bringing the total estimated value to £300,000. Why is the Multi-Track appropriate?

Answer:
The Multi-Track is appropriate primarily due to the financial value exceeding the Fast Track limit (£25,000). Additionally, the complexity stemming from multiple specialist medical fields and the need for detailed assessment of future losses confirms its suitability for the tailored case management offered by the Multi-Track.

Exam Warning

Do not assume financial value is the only factor for track allocation. A claim within the Fast Track's financial limits might be allocated to the Multi-Track if it involves significant complexity, multiple issues, or requires a trial longer than one day. Always consider all criteria in CPR 26.8. Equally, a claim under £10,000 may be unsuitable for the Small Claims Track if it involves disputed dishonesty or multiple expert fields. Pay particular attention to RTA-related personal injury claims: despite higher PSLA thresholds for small claims, exceptions and case-specific factors may point away from the Small Claims Track in some circumstances.

Worked Example 1.3

A road traffic accident personal injury claim issued after 31 May 2021 seeks PSLA of £4,800 and vehicle damage of £1,700. Liability is admitted, and the dispute concerns quantum. Which track is most likely?

Answer:
The Small Claims Track is likely because the PSLA component is under the higher RTA PI small claims threshold and the overall sums are modest. The court will regard the claim as suitable for a streamlined process, with expert evidence limited and costs kept proportionate.

Worked Example 1.4

A claimant seeks an injunction to restrain repeated trespass by a neighbour causing minor property damage valued at £3,000. The defendant disputes boundary location, requiring land registry plans and surveyor evidence. Which track is appropriate?

Answer:
Despite the modest monetary value, the remedy sought (injunction) and the complexity of the factual and expert issues make the claim unsuitable for Small Claims and likely unsuitable for Fast Track if more than one day is required. The court is likely to allocate to the Multi-Track to provide flexible, tailored case management.

Worked Example 1.5

A consumer claim for £9,500 alleges defective goods and requires expert evidence from two disciplines (materials and electrical engineering). The defendant contests liability and causation. Which track is likely?

Answer:
Although the value falls within Small Claims, the need for multiple expert fields and complexity makes Small Claims inappropriate. The court will likely allocate to the Fast Track, provided the trial can be kept within one day and oral expert evidence is limited (e.g., by using a single joint expert where suitable). If the trial cannot be contained to one day, Multi-Track becomes more likely.

Worked Example 1.6

A claim is issued for £20,000 with a realistic estimate of two days for trial due to numerous factual witnesses. Which track is most likely?

Answer:
The Fast Track requires a trial not exceeding one day. As the trial length is estimated at two days, the case is unsuitable for Fast Track and will likely be allocated to the Multi-Track despite the value falling within the Fast Track range.

Re-allocation

The court retains the power to reallocate a claim to a different track after the initial allocation if the circumstances change significantly (CPR 26.10). For example, if a claim initially valued within the Fast Track limit increases substantially due to new evidence or if a substantial counterclaim is added, it might be reallocated to the Multi-Track. Reallocation can be ordered on application or of the court’s own initiative. The court can also vary or supplement directions in response to developments (e.g., the emergence of significant new expert issues). Where parties anticipate a need to reallocate, they should promptly notify the court and propose revised directions to avoid delay and disproportionate cost.

Revision Tip

Focus on understanding the purpose of each track and the key criteria for allocation. For the exam, be prepared to identify the most appropriate track based on a given scenario, justifying your choice by reference to factors like value, complexity, and trial length. Do not aggregate claim and counterclaim values for allocation unless the court directs; rely instead on the largest single claim and consider CPR 26.8 factors in the round.

Key Point Checklist

This article has covered the following key knowledge points:

• Track allocation is the process of assigning a defended civil claim to the Small Claims, Fast, or Multi-Track.
• The primary aim is to ensure cases are dealt with justly and at proportionate cost, in line with the overriding objective (CPR 1.1).
• Allocation follows the filing of a defence, initiated by a Notice of Proposed Allocation and informed by the parties' Directions Questionnaires.
• Key criteria for allocation (CPR 26.8) include financial value, complexity, remedy sought, number of parties, evidence required, and the parties' views.
• Financial value thresholds are generally £10,000 for Small Claims and £25,000 for Fast Track; personal injury and housing disrepair have specific thresholds, including higher PSLA limits for certain RTA claims.
• The court disregards amounts not in dispute, interest, costs, and contributory negligence when assessing financial value for allocation (CPR 26.8(2)).
• Claim and counterclaim values are not generally aggregated for allocation; the largest claim typically determines financial value (PD 26).
• The Small Claims Track (CPR 27) uses simplified procedures, has limited costs recovery, restricts expert evidence without permission, and is unsuitable for cases involving disputed dishonesty.
• The Fast Track (CPR 28) follows a standard timetable with trials limited to one day, uses single joint experts where suitable, and tight cost control including summary assessment and fixed trial advocacy fees.
• The Multi-Track (CPR 29) offers flexible, tailored case management, often involving CMCs, costs budgeting (CPR 3.12), disclosure reports, and bespoke disclosure orders.
• The court may list an allocation hearing to resolve disputes or clarify case management needs and may order early neutral evaluation to assist settlement.
• The court can reallocate a claim if circumstances change (CPR 26.10), and directions can be varied to ensure proportionate case management.

Key Terms and Concepts

• Overriding Objective
• Notice of Proposed Allocation
• Directions Questionnaire
• Allocation Hearing
• Pre-Trial Checklist
• Single Joint Expert
• Case Management Conference (CMC)
• Costs Budget
• Disclosure Report
• Early Neutral Evaluation