Case Management and Track Allocation
Dispute Resolution > Case Management and Track Allocation
A contract dispute with a claim value of £18,000 is straightforward, requires no expert evidence beyond a brief written report, and is expected to settle without needing more than one day at trial. The court must decide which track to allocate this claim to—and the answer determines which procedural rules apply, what directions the court gives, and how long the case will take. This scenario tests SQE1 candidates on the criteria for track allocation.
What Is Case Management and Track Allocation in SQE1?
Candidates frequently lose marks on SQE1 by misidentifying the correct track for a claim — especially the £1,000 general damages threshold that moves personal injury claims from the small claims track to the fast track. Case management and track allocation are the procedural mechanisms by which courts manage claims efficiently and proportionately. Once a defendant responds to a claim (or the response period expires), the court issues an allocation questionnaire to determine the claim's complexity, value, and likely trial length. On the basis of these factors, the court allocates the claim to a track: small claims, fast track, or multi-track. Each track carries different procedural rules, costs consequences, and timetables.
Understanding track allocation is essential for SQE1 because examiners frequently test the financial thresholds for each track, the characteristics of claims suitable for each track, and the consequences of allocation. Candidates must also understand how track allocation interacts with pre-action conduct, responding to a claim, and interim applications. The court's case management powers under CPR Part 3 are also frequently tested, particularly the power to strike out for serious non-compliance.
This topic is closely linked to costs and funding and forms a key part of the Dispute Resolution syllabus for SQE1.
Key Principles for SQE1
-
Small Claims Track: Claims up to £10,000 (with a personal injury limit of £1,000 for PI claims). Limited disclosure, limited expert evidence, and generally no recovery of legal costs. The judge has power to strike out for serious non-compliance with court orders.
-
Fast Track: Claims valued between £10,000 and £25,000, likely to be resolved with limited disclosure and trial lasting no more than one day. Procedural steps are tightly timetabled by the court.
-
Multi-Track: Claims over £25,000 or complex cases (regardless of value). Parties must file costs budgets. The timetable is more flexible and tailored to the case's complexity.
-
Track Allocation Criteria: Financial value of the claim; complexity; number of parties and witnesses; likely trial length; and the nature of the issues in dispute. Proportionality is the overarching principle.
-
Case Management Directions: Once a track is allocated, the court issues directions setting out the timetable for disclosure, serving evidence, exchanging expert reports, and preparing for trial.
-
Striking Out Power: The court has power to strike out a claim or defence for serious, persistent non-compliance with court orders or rules (CPR Part 3).
Exam tip
When you see a case value, immediately map it to the correct track: small claims (up to £10,000, or £1,000 for personal injury), fast track (£10,000–£25,000), or multi-track (over £25,000). Personal injury claims have different thresholds—the small claims limit is only £1,000 for PI, not £10,000. Track allocation determines which procedural rules apply, so getting this right is crucial for SQE1.
How This Appears in SQE1 Questions
SQE1 questions on case management and track allocation typically give you the claim value, a description of complexity, and ask you to identify the appropriate track. A common trap is forgetting that personal injury claims have a different small claims threshold (£1,000) compared to other claims (£10,000). Questions may also test the consequences of allocation—for example, the scope of disclosure or the rule against recovering legal costs in small claims. You might also see questions about the court's power to strike out for non-compliance with directions, or questions asking about the timetable for serving evidence and disclosure. This is a classic SQE1 trap.
Common Mistakes Students Make
- Forgetting that personal injury claims have a £1,000 small claims limit, not £10,000—many candidates mistakenly apply the standard £10,000 threshold to PI claims.
- Confusing the track allocation criteria with the track itself—value alone does not determine track allocation; complexity and trial length also matter.
- Overlooking proportionality—the court may allocate a claim under £10,000 to the fast track if it is complex.
- Assuming that a case can stay in small claims if the parties agree—the court's allocation decision is binding.
Quick Summary
- Small claims track: up to £10,000 (personal injury claims above £1,000 excluded).
- Fast track: £10,000–£25,000 with trial likely lasting one day or less.
- Multi-track: claims over £25,000 or complex cases.
- Track allocation depends on financial value, complexity, and trial length.
- The court has power to strike out for serious non-compliance with court orders or directions.
Want to test this now? Try a few SQE1-style questions below before moving on.
Test Yourself
Test yourself
Quick check questions based on this article.
Question 1
Scenario
A claimant issues proceedings against a defendant for breach of a consultancy agreement, seeking damages of £18,000. The claimant also seeks a declaration that the consultancy agreement was validly terminated. The defendant files a defence denying breach and a counterclaim for £8,000 in respect of unpaid invoices. Both parties file directions questionnaires. The claimant indicates that the trial is likely to last two days and that expert evidence from an IT specialist will be needed. The defendant indicates that the trial is likely to last one day and that no expert evidence is necessary. The claim involves allegations of technical non-performance of software deliverables. The claimant's solicitor has not proposed mediation. The defendant's solicitor has proposed a stay for mediation but the claimant has not responded. The court is considering track allocation. The claimant recently changed solicitors, which caused a short delay in filing the directions questionnaire. Both parties are limited companies. The financial value of the counterclaim is not disputed.
To which track is the court most likely to allocate this case?
Question 2
Scenario
A solicitor acts for a defendant in a commercial dispute on the multi-track. The claimant claims £120,000 for breach of a distribution agreement. The court has given directions including standard disclosure. The claimant's solicitor applies for a direction that the defendant provide disclosure using predictive coding, a form of technology-assisted review. The defendant's solicitor objects on the grounds that the firm does not have the technology or expertise to conduct predictive coding. The defendant holds approximately 500,000 electronic documents that may be relevant. The claimant's solicitor argues that predictive coding would be more cost-effective and proportionate than manual review of such a large volume. The defendant's solicitor recently attended a continuing professional development seminar on artificial intelligence in law. The court is considering the application at a case management conference.
Which of the following principles is the court most likely to apply when deciding whether to order predictive coding?
Question 3
Scenario
A claim for professional negligence against a firm of accountants has been issued in the County Court. The claim is valued at £180,000. The claimant alleges that the accountants provided negligent tax advice, resulting in an unexpected tax liability. The defendant denies negligence and asserts that the claimant failed to provide complete financial information. Both parties have filed their statements of case. The court has sent allocation questionnaires to both parties. The claimant's solicitor has completed the questionnaire, estimating that the trial will last three days and that expert accountancy evidence will be required from both sides. The defendant's solicitor agrees with the time estimate but suggests that a single joint expert would be more proportionate. The claim involves a substantial volume of electronic documents, including emails and spreadsheets. Both solicitors agree that standard disclosure would be appropriate. The claimant's solicitor also noted that the defendant firm had recently relocated to new offices. The court must now allocate the claim to the appropriate track.
To which track is the court most likely to allocate this claim?
Practice with full exam-style questions
Related Topics
- Dispute Resolution for SQE1: Complete Guide
- Pre-action Conduct and Protocols
- Issuing and Serving a Claim
- Responding to a Claim
Practise Case Management and Track Allocation Questions for SQE1
Want to solidify your knowledge? ActusPrep provides realistic SQE1 questions tailored to this topic.
👉 Try our free demo: https://actusprep.com/demo 👉 View plans and pricing: https://actusprep.com/pricing