The Final Hearing Bundle in a civil tribunal case which follows the usual procedure is produced after all previous steps, including statements of case, disclosure of documents, and exchange of witness statements. This means that when statements of case, disclosure lists, and witness statements are produced, the eventual Bundle page number of each document they refer to will be unknown. Consequently some other system of reference number (other than Bundle page number) must be used in statements of case, disclosure lists, and witness statements etc. to refer to documents, and then the final Bundle, when it is produced, needs to be arranged in such a way that someone reading though the copy of a witness statement etc., in the final Bundle, and coming across a reference, can easily display (if using a computer) or turn to (if using hardcopy) the document with that reference wherever it is within the Bundle.
A witness statement is an obvious example of a document which may be in a Bundle which is likely to refer to other documents by reference number, but there are others.
Copies of the documents referred to in a witness statement will accompany the statement when it is provided at the "exchange of witness statements" stage, each document copy being labelled with a unique exhibit mark consisting of the witness's initials followed by a serial number. A paragraph in the statement might refer to a document by saying, for example, I sent Mr Jones a letter dated 10 September 2020. I refer to this letter marked Exhibit JJS23.
For statements of case, labelled copies of the documents referred to are not normally necessary. Unlike witness statements which are made by a witness, who may not be a party, but are always sent out by the party which intends to rely on the witness's evidence, statements of case are always made by a party and sent out by that same party and so the party is in a position to ensure that the accompanying documents have the correct filenames, including references used in the Statement of Case, so that there can be no misunderstanding about which document is which. The conventions for reference numbers used in statements of case are less well established than for exhibits referred to in witness statements but a common format is e.g. App-8 (for document 8 in the Applicant's Statement of Case) or Resp-12 (for document 12 in the Respondents' Statement of Case).
At the disclosure of documents stage the parties exchange copies of relevant documents they have in their possession together with a list of them - "disclosure list". An item on the the Respondent's list might be e.g. Rd-41 for the forty-first document.
References in e.g. the Respondent's statement of case might be prefixed with Resp- and that is different from the reference prefix for the Respondent's disclosure list e.g. Rd- so that the two references are easily distinguishable but it is, nevertheless, usual to number documents on the disclosure list not from 1 but from where the numbering of documents accompanying the statement of case left off. So, for example, if the documents accompanying the Respondent's statement of case are numbered from Resp-1 to Resp-15, the references used in the Respondent's disclosure list would start at Rd-16.
Similarly if there should need to be a supplementary disclosure list because new relevant documents have come to light after the main disclosure of documents stage, documents in the Respondent's supplementary disclosure list would start at As-55 if the Respondent's previous disclosure list ended with Rd-54.
Most case summaries are produced, after the Bundle has been finalised, by each party's barrister (and so refer to documents by Bundle page number) but a Land Registry Case Summary is a special case. A Land Registry Case Summary is produced by H.M. Land Registry when they refer a disputed application to the Land Registration Division of the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) at the very beginning of tribunal proceedings. A common reference format is LRCS-6 (for document 6 listed in the Land Registry Case Summary).
The documents which are to appear in the Bundle will typically be loaded to a document management system which can then automatically produce a PDF version of the Bundle - often known as an eBundle - complete with numbered pages, an "Index" at the top listing the name of each document (in the other it appears within the Bundle, with its starting page number within the Bundle), and complete with corresponding PDF bookmarks. The name of each document will commence with its reference e.g. Resp-6 so that someone reading though the copy of a document (such as a statement of case) which refers to it quoting Resp-6, should be able to find it within the Bundle as the document will have Resp-6 in its bookmark and in its index entry.
Turning up referred-to documents is something a user of the eBundle needs to do frequently so it is helpful if the process can be made as easy as possible by doing the following.
All PDF software will have a Find function which can be used to locate a document by the reference in its bookmark, however some PDF software is much easier to use than other software. The best requires just a couple of taps to follow a reference whilst the worst requires many taps and some typing, so it is useful if the Bundle contains an "About this Bundle" page, just after the Index making suggestions about which PDF software to use (the best, the cheapest, what to avoid if possible) and how to use it to efficiently turn to each referred-to document as the user comes to a reference to it in a witness statement or other document they are reading through.
It is even better if most (or preferably all) references in witness statements etc. are hyperlinked so that the user can go to the document referred to with a single click without even having to use Find.
Users of the Bundle hardcopy cannot use Find or hyperlinks. So that they are not solely reliant on looking up references in the Index, it is helpful if the starting page number of each referred to document is written in the right hand margin each time a reference is quoted in a witness statement etc. This can also help eBundle users if there are any instances where a document is mentioned without a reference being quoted.
When a duplicate document is removed from the Bundle, it is important that any statement of case, witness statement, Land Registry Case Summary or any other document in the Bundle is not left with a "broken link" - a quoted reference which does not match with the reference in the name of any included document. So if, for example, Exhibit JJS6 (referred to in the witness statement of John James Smith) is removed from the Bundle because it is the same document as Exhibit PMA12 (referred to in the witness statement of Paul Martin Ashby), then Exhibit PMA12 would have the reference JJS6 added to its name (after PMA12) so that the witness statement of John James Smith is not left with a "broken link".
Disclosure lists are generally not included in Bundles (because any query over disclosed documents would be dealt with before the Bundle is finalised so there is no need to include disclosure lists). Consequently there is no need to add the disclosure list reference in a removed duplicate to the copy remaining included as there is no "link" which would be broken. Note, however, that in some High Court cases it is the practice, where possible, to refer, in witness statements, to documents by disclosure list number (Claimant's disclosure reference if the document is on the Claimant's disclosure list, otherwise the Defendant's disclosure reference) rather than exhibiting them. This can be done in certain High Court cases for the statements of witnesses who are actually parties with access to the numbered Disclosure Lists previously exchanged. This approach will not always be suitable for third-party witnesses (i.e. witnesses who can give relevant evidence but are not themselves parties to the litigation) and they may need to exhibit labelled documents in the normal way. If there are any witness statements which do refer to documents by disclosure list number then care is necessary when removing duplicates to avoid "broken links" with disclosure references.
Disclaimer
This information page is designed to be used by clients of John Antell who have entered into a written agreement for the provision of legal services.
Any explanation about naming conventions or other matters in the context of legal procedure is only an overview and in order to be reasonably concise I have had to leave some details out - details which are likely to affect what the procedural law would say about your own situation. Also, even as an overview, the information will not be applicable to every case as procedures vary between different courts and other tribunals and any tribunal may give alternative procedural directions in an individual case. So please do not rely on the above but contact me for advice.
Any information about specific computer techniques is provided for information purposes only and you should satisfy yourself, before using any techniques, software or services mentioned, that the techniques are appropriate for your purposes and that the software or service is reliable.
Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that the information in this page is accurate and up to date at the time it was written but no responsibility for its accuracy, or for any consequences of relying on it, is assumed by me.
This page was lasted updated in December 2025. Disclaimer