Track allocation in civil claims, explained simply

Why the court uses tracks

The Civil Procedure Rules have the overriding objective of enabling the court to deal with cases justly and at proportionate cost (rule 1.1). That includes dealing with a case in ways that are proportionate to the amount of money involved and to the complexity of the issues. Allocating each claim to a track is how the court matches the procedure to the dispute.

The small claims track is intended for most straightforward claims worth not more than £10,000. Its procedure avoids substantial preparation before the hearing and the formalities of a traditional trial, so that a person can conduct their own case without a lawyer (Practice Direction 26, paragraph 15). A claim worth several hundred thousand pounds, with many witnesses and experts, needs fuller preparation and a longer trial, and the multi-track provides for that.

The conditions for each track measure a dispute by things that can be counted: the money in dispute, the days the trial will take, the number of experts who will give oral evidence and the number of parties.

The four tracks at a glance

The table sets out when each track is the normal track for a claim for money only. Every figure is an upper limit. No track has a minimum value: a claim reaches a higher track because it fails a condition of the track below.

The intermediate track also requires the court to consider that the claim can be justly and proportionately managed under the intermediate track procedure in Part 28, and that there are no additional factors that would make the claim inappropriate for that track (rule 26.9(7)(c)).

The multi-track is the normal track for any claim for which none of the other three is the normal track (rule 26.9(12)). Some claims must be allocated to the multi-track whatever their value. They include a mesothelioma claim and a claim for damages in relation to harm, abuse or neglect of or by children or vulnerable adults (rule 26.9(10)).

Where a claim includes a claim for something other than money, such as an injunction, further conditions apply before the fast track or the intermediate track can be the normal track (rule 26.9(5) and (8)).

The present Part 26 dates from 1 October 2023, when the old Part 26 was replaced and the intermediate track was created, and it has been amended since. It applies to claims issued on or after that date, and personal injury claims are subject to further transitional conditions (Civil Procedure (Amendment No. 2) Rules 2023, rule 2).

Start at the lowest track and work up

Take the lowest track whose conditions the claim meets.

1. Small claims track. If the value is not more than £10,000, and the claim is within any lower limit that applies to it, the small claims track is the normal track.
2. Fast track. If the small claims track is not the normal track, the fast track is the normal track only if the value is not more than £25,000, the trial is likely to last no longer than one day, and oral expert evidence at trial is likely to be limited to one expert per party in any expert field and to two expert fields.
3. Intermediate track. If the claim is suitable for neither of the lower tracks, the intermediate track is the normal track if the value is not more than £100,000, the trial will not last longer than three days if the case is managed proportionately, oral expert evidence at trial is likely to be limited to two experts per party, and the claim is brought by one claimant against one or two defendants or by two claimants against one defendant. The two further matters in rule 26.9(7)(c) described above must also be met.
4. Multi-track. If none of the lower tracks is the normal track, the multi-track is.

Value alone does not settle the track. A claim for £15,000 that needs a two-day trial fails the fast track condition on trial length, so the intermediate track is the normal track if its conditions are met. A claim for £55,000 brought against three defendants fails the intermediate track condition on parties, so the multi-track is the normal track. The court may still allocate a claim to the intermediate track where it considers that to be in the interests of justice (rule 26.9(9)).

For most claims, what the parties disagree about is not a condition of the normal track. None of the conditions described above asks whether liability or the amount is disputed, so the fast track or the intermediate track can be the normal track for a claim in which both are disputed. Clinical negligence is the exception. A claim which includes a claim for clinical negligence must be allocated to the multi-track unless it would normally be allocated to the intermediate track, the defendant has admitted liability in full in its letter of response under the pre-action protocol, and the defendant has not raised a limitation defence (rule 26.9(10)(b)).

The normal track is the starting point, and allocation is the court's decision. In deciding whether to allocate a claim to its normal track the court has regard to the matters listed in rule 26.13(1), which include the complexity of the facts, law or evidence, the amount of oral evidence and the views of the parties. The court treats the parties' views as an important factor but is not bound by them (Practice Direction 26, paragraph 14(9)).

How the value of a claim is assessed

The court assesses the financial value of the claim. In doing so it disregards any amount not in dispute, any claim for interest, costs and any contributory negligence (rule 26.13(2)).

A specific sum claimed as a distinct item, which the defendant admits it is liable to pay, is not in dispute (Practice Direction 26, paragraph 14(7)). Suppose a claimant sues on two invoices, one for £8,000 and one for £19,000, and the defendant admits that it owes the first. The value for allocation is £19,000.

A counterclaim is not deducted from the claim, and the court will not generally add it to the claim. Where a case involves more than one money claim, the court will not generally add the claims together. It will generally treat the largest of them as determining the financial value (Practice Direction 26, paragraph 14(10)). The value of the counterclaim and the complexity of the matters it raises are among the matters the court has regard to when it decides the track (rule 26.13(1)(e)).

Lower small claims limits for personal injury and housing repairs

The small claims track is the normal track for a claim for personal injuries only if the value of the whole claim is not more than £10,000 and the damages claimed for pain, suffering and loss of amenity are within a lower limit (rule 26.9(1) and (2)).

That lower limit is £5,000 where the injury arose from a road traffic accident, and £1,500 in any other personal injury claim. For some road traffic accident claims it is £1,000. Those include claims where the accident occurred before 31 May 2021, and claims where the claimant was a pedestrian, or was riding a bicycle, a motorcycle or a horse, when the accident occurred (rule 26.9(1)(a)(ii) and rule 26.10).

Only the damages for pain, suffering and loss of amenity are measured against the lower limit. Other losses, such as lost earnings, count towards the £10,000 total.

The small claims track is the normal track for a tenant's claim for an order requiring a landlord to repair residential premises only if the cost of the work is estimated at not more than £1,000 and any other claim for damages is worth not more than £1,000 (rule 26.9(1)(b)).

Where a claim exceeds a lower limit, the small claims track is not its normal track, even if its total value is not more than £10,000. The fast track is then tested in the usual way. An employee injured in a fall at work who claims £8,000 in total, of which £3,000 is for pain, suffering and loss of amenity, exceeds the £1,500 limit. The fast track is the normal track if the trial is likely to last no longer than one day and the expert evidence is within the fast track limit.