For each copy document received which does not match copies already in your document management system, load it initially to a new temporary folder/section. If you are at the Statements of Case stage and you are sent, with the Statement of Case, key documents, they should be listed in the Statement of Case with unique references - e.g. Resp-1, Resp-2, Resp-3 etc. Similarly if you are at the general Disclosure of Documents stage they should be accompanied by a numbered list. When loading each document ensure you include the number and, if it is just a number, add a prefix to identify it as a document sent by the other side - e.g. Rd-41.
Some of the documents you receive accompanying a statement of case may be the same as document copies you already have loaded in which case you don't have to load the new copy received - you can just add the unique reference to the copy already loaded.
Ideally the other side, when disclosing documents, will send them to you as computer files each one with a filename with a descriptive name - e.g. Conveyance 22 May 1980.pdf - in which case it should be easy to load. Or you may have been sent a large single PDF containing multiple documents each of which is bookmarked with a descriptive name and date so that you can easily extract the individual documents and load them.
Note 1: Before you decide that a document copy you have received is the same as a copy already loaded, check carefully that it really is the same. The recipient of a letter might have made a hand-written annotation on it, for example, so that although, at first glance, the copy disclosed by each party may appear to be the same, on closer inspection they are in fact different, so that the document copy should be loaded after all as a separate document.
Note 2: Most documents consist of typed text and providing the copy already loaded is clear it is not necessary to load a new copy received just because it is very slightly clearer. However if a document copy received is a photo, plan, or diagram and it is clearer than the copy already loaded then you should normally load the new copy. You can then either actually delete the previous copy or move it to some kind of "excluded" section/folder, but when you do this make sure that if it has an exhibit mark or other reference you add that to the new clearer copy which you have decided to load.
If the other side have sent you computer files each one with a filename named with a descriptive name e.g. Letter Smith to Jones 22 May 2020.pdf then there should be no dispute later about what was disclosed, but if the documents have been sent in some other, less satisfactory, form it may be wise to confirm with the other side exactly what they have disclosed to guard against the possibility of disputes arising later (perhaps arising just before the final hearing when the issue of what documents can be included in the Final Hearing Bundle arises).
If documents have been disclosed in paper form, one of the problems which can arise is that there may be a dispute over whether a particular document was in fact disclosed. When the Final Hearing Bundle is being compiled a party, the Applicant say, may wish to include a document, the Respondent may object saying that they have not seen it before, the Applicant may point to the document being on the list sent when documents were disclosed and say that they are sure that they sent a copy of everything on the list and, in any case, if they had missed out a copy why did the Respondent not raise this at the time? The Respondent may reply that because copies were received in paper form, and the description of documents on the list was a bit cryptic they had thought that another document a copy of which was included was the one referred to on the list.
To guard against such possible disputes it is good practice, whenever the form of documents disclosed by the other side raises any doubt, to send back to the other side copies of the documents they have disclosed (either all documents they have disclosed or some particular category where there is doubt), in the form of computer files each one with a filename named with a descriptive name and the date - e.g. Letter Smith to Jones 22 May 2020.pdf and ask them to confirm that they agree that this is indeed all the documents they have disclosed/disclosed in that category.
If you decide to send back to the other side copies of all the documents they have disclosed (in a particular category) in the form of individual computer files in order to avoid any later dispute about what was received, you can do that as part of the process of loading the documents. After you have loaded the documents to the new temporary folder/section and before you move the documents out of that temporary folder/section to other sections, generate a ZIP file with a list entitled e.g. Confirmatory List (produced by the Applicant) of documents disclosed by the Respondent - if you are the Applicant or Confirmatory List (produced by the Respondent) of documents disclosed by the Applicant - if you are the Respondent.
You can then send the ZIP file with the list to the other side saying that to avoid any misunderstanding or dispute later on can they confirm that they agree that it is a complete set of the documents they have disclosed in the category.
Although it depends, to a certain extent, on the type of legal proceedings, it is usual for the parties to disclose documents at the following stages of litigation before the final hearing:-
1. As part of a Land Registry application or during the pre-action correspondence phase (generally documents produced in this phase, before formal legal proceedings have actually commenced, are produced voluntarily rather than being ordered by the tribunal) or
2. At the initial Statements of Case stage
3. At the main Disclosure of Documents stage
4. Late disclosure - occasionally, despite searching, a document which should have been disclosed is missed at the main Disclosure of Documents stage so they disclose it as soon as it comes to light
If the other side is disclosing documents to you at stages 1 or 2 you should consider whether you need to challenge their authenticity. If the other side is disclosing documents to you at stage 3 or later you should consider whether you need to challenge their authenticity and also consider the question of their completeness.
When the other side discloses documents to you at stage 3 or later - so that they are, at that stage, purporting to have disclosed all relevant (non-privileged) documents to you (or all documents in particular categories depending on what the tribunal has ordered) - you should consider whether there are indications that in fact not all relevant documents, which they other side has, have been disclosed. For example they may have disclosed an internal email which responds to a report but have not disclosed the report itself. Or perhaps the body of an email is provided, and you can see from it that there were attachments, but the attachments themselves have not been provided. Or you might have special knowledge which means that you know, or strongly suspect, that the other party has relevant documents which they have not disclosed. The other side has a duty to comply with any order the tribunal makes about disclosure, searching for relevant documents, but they may genuinely not be aware of the existence of certain documents until you specifically ask them to disclose them. For example if the other party is an organisation and you attended a meeting with them you may have noticed a particular employee of that organisation taking notes so you know that those notes exist but the person in the organisation dealing with its disclosure obligations may not be aware of that until you ask them to disclose those notes.
Generally speaking a party has to provide copies of relevant documents unless it no longer has them and it no longer has control over them. If a party has sent documents to their bank for safe keeping, for example, those documents are still under their control because they have the power to require the organisation holding them to return them. And even if the organisation is keeping documents such as deeds for unregistered land as security for a loan, the party still has the power to require the organisation to provide copies. So that is not a valid reason for failing to provide copies of them.
The question of whether a document is authentic (genuine) is distinct from the question of whether what the document says is accurate. For example, say the other side had disclosed a letter written to you at some time in the past, which contains a complaint that you had caused an obstruction by parking your car in a particular place at a particular time on a particular date. If you received the letter at the time but you dispute the accuracy of what it says, the letter is still authentic – i.e. it is a genuine copy of a letter actually written on the date it bears by the person whose name appears in the signature and sent outthe same day or shortly thereafter. If, however, you think that the letter is a fabrication – that it is not a genuine copy of a letter written on the date it bears because, say, you didn’t receive it at the time and it gives as your address an address which you didn’t move to until three years after the date the letter was supposed to have been written - that would be an example of a document which is not authentic. It is not uncommon for parties to dispute the accuracy of what historical documents say but relatively unusual for the authenticity of a document to be challenged.
Traditionally the courts had very strict rules about what documents could be admissible as evidence and documents had to be formally proved to be authentic by being "produced" at the final hearing by a witness who could say what the document was and where it had come from. But the general approach now, in both civil courts and other civil tribunals, is that documents disclosed by either party are normally assumed to be authentic unless the other side specifically challenges the authenticity of a particular document.
You therefore need to consider whether you need to challenge the authenticity of any of the documents which are disclosed by the other side.
You may want to rely on some documents disclosed by the other side and, especially in the case of photos, their metadata. Different tribunals have different specific rules but the general approach is that a party which intends to rely on a specific item of metadata is expected to make that clear by, for example, sending a PDF "print" of the image with accompanying metadata to the other side in good time.
Once you have reviewed the new documents and at least set in motion any appropriate challenges by writing to the other side, and you have set the names and disclosure party fields as appropriate, you are ready to move the new documents to the most appropriate positions in the most appropriate folders/sections. But before doing so, double-check that the names and disclosure party fields are correctly set for documents already in those folders/sections so that you do not lose track of which side disclosed which document copies.
As a precaution against any later disputes, keep carefully the original disclosed documents and list. If the other side should later say that they will be relying at the Final Hearing on a document you think you have not seen before which is not in your document management system, and the other side insist that they did send you a copy at the Disclosure of Documents stage, you need to be able to go back and look at the original materials to establish who is right.
Disclaimer
This information page is designed to be used only by clients of John Antell who have entered into an agreement for the provision of legal services. The information in it is necessarily of a general nature and will not be applicable to every case: it is intended to be used only in conjunction with more specific advice to the individual client about the individual case. This information page should not be used by, or relied on, by anyone else.
The information on this page about specific computer techniques is provided for information purposes only. Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that the information 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. You should satisfy yourself, before using any of the techniques, software or services described, that the techniques are appropriate for your purposes and that the software or service is reliable.
This page was lasted updated in November 2025. Disclaimer.