{"id":4909,"date":"2021-03-29T14:29:00","date_gmt":"2021-03-29T12:29:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/djp-a9vm.1wp.site\/?p=4909"},"modified":"2026-10-19T19:05:38","modified_gmt":"2026-10-19T17:05:38","slug":"a-fish-rots-from-the-head-and-a-pleading-starts-to-go-wrong-in-its-heading","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/djp.pl\/en\/a-fish-rots-from-the-head-and-a-pleading-starts-to-go-wrong-in-its-heading\/","title":{"rendered":"A fish rots from the head, and a pleading starts to go wrong in its heading"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong>Surely everyone agrees that concision is desirable in a pleading. A concise document improves the chances that the court will understand and remember our arguments and, above all, actually read them carefully. Verbose pleadings repel judges and invite, at best, a quick skim or complete disregard, particularly if the document is neither the first nor the last in the case. We should therefore waste no space: the shorter we can write while preserving meaning, the better. Yet how much space we sometimes waste in the heading alone! How many unnecessary elements, especially repetitions, could be removed! Let us look at examples.<\/strong><\/p>\n<h2>Examples of a pleading\u2019s heading and opening<\/h2>\n<p>Example 1 (bad):<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p><strong>Regional Court in [\u2026]<\/strong><br \/><strong>[\u2026] Civil Division<\/strong><br \/>[address]<\/p>\n<p><strong>Claimant:<\/strong><br \/>X, [PESEL number], residing at [\u2026]<br \/>represented by<br \/>counsel:<br \/>attorney [\u2026]<\/p>\n<p><strong>Defendant:<\/strong><br \/>Y, [PESEL number], residing at [\u2026]<br \/>represented by<br \/>counsel:<br \/>attorney Jan Unreflective<\/p>\n<p><strong>Case reference: [\u2026]<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>Defendant Y\u2019s response to claimant X\u2019s statement of claim dated [\u2026], case reference [\u2026]<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Acting on behalf of defendant Y, pursuant to the litigation power of attorney dated [\u2026], a certified copy of which is attached hereto as annex 1, hereby, in response to the order of the Regional Court in [\u2026], [\u2026] Civil Division, dated [\u2026], case reference [\u2026], requiring a response to the statement of claim within 14 days, served on defendant Y on [\u2026], I hereby submit defendant Y\u2019s response to claimant X\u2019s statement of claim dated [\u2026], case reference [\u2026], and hereby request:<\/p>\n<p>1) dismissal of the claim in its entirety as unfounded;<\/p>\n<p>2) an award from the claimant to the defendant of litigation costs, including legal representation costs, at the prescribed rates.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>Example 2 (good):<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p><strong>Regional Court in [\u2026]<\/strong><br \/><strong>[\u2026] Civil Division<\/strong><br \/>[address]<\/p>\n<p><strong>Claimant:<\/strong><br \/>X, [PESEL number], residing at [\u2026]<br \/>Counsel:<br \/>attorney [\u2026]<\/p>\n<p><strong>Defendant:<\/strong><br \/>Y, [PESEL number], residing at [\u2026]<br \/>Counsel:<br \/>attorney Jan Thoughtful<\/p>\n<p><strong>Case reference: [\u2026]<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>Response to the statement of claim<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>As Y\u2019s counsel (power of attorney attached), I request:<\/p>\n<p>1) dismissal of the claim in its entirety;<\/p>\n<p>2) an award from X to Y of litigation costs, including representation costs, at the prescribed rates.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<h2>Why simplify the heading and opening?<\/h2>\n<p>Which version encourages you to read on: example 1 or example 2?<\/p>\n<p>The question is rhetorical. Instead of answering, let us explain why we can omit all those things in example 1: the court already knows them.<\/p>\n<p>The parties\u2019 names and case reference appear at the very start. Repeating them in the title and subsequent opening is pointless.<\/p>\n<p>Since the document is a response to the statement of claim, it clearly comes from the defendant identified above, Y, responding to the claim brought by the identified claimant, X, in the case bearing the stated reference. The title need only say \u201cResponse to the statement of claim\u201d, without repeating whose response and whose claim.<\/p>\n<p>The response is the defendant\u2019s first pleading. Where represented by counsel, a power of attorney bearing the principal\u2019s signature, in original or certified copy, generally must be attached under Article 89 \u00a7 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The court will see the attached document. A general reference such as \u201cpower of attorney attached\u201d suffices. There is no need to describe its date or whether it is an original or copy.<\/p>\n<p>The court also knows, or will check and recall from the file, that it ordered the defendant to file a response within a specified period. Saying we file it in compliance with that order is unnecessary.<\/p>\n<p>The same applies to the date the defendant received the claim and order to respond. That date matters for timeliness, but the court will check the acknowledgment of receipt in its file, rather than rely on information in the response itself. Providing the date serves no purpose.<\/p>\n<p>There is likewise no reason, particularly given the above, to state in the response that we are submitting a response: the title already says so.<\/p>\n<p>If the court knows it has a response in a case with the stated reference between the identified parties, it also knows which claim the requests concern. We can proceed directly to them, for example requesting dismissal in full.<\/p>\n<p>If everything is clear without additional information, why provide it?<\/p>\n<p>You may now wonder what this has to do with the article\u2019s title. If I see an opponent\u2019s pleading start like example 1\u2014which was only slightly exaggerated; I have encountered every phrase in practice\u2014I immediately assume the rest will be long-winded and reading it an ordeal. Experience has taught me this and almost always proves me right. The heading and opening are a calling card: a preview and, to some extent, an indicator of quality.<\/p>\n<p>Most importantly, judges, who read incomparably more pleadings, may well make the same assumption. Let us ensure the good impression we want our pleadings to make does not rot from the head.<\/p>\n<p><em>This article expresses only my personal views.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Surely everyone agrees that concision is desirable in a pleading. A concise document improves the chances that the court will understand and remember our arguments and, above all, actually read them carefully. Verbose pleadings repel judges and invite, at best, a quick skim or complete disregard, particularly if the document\u2026<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8,"featured_media":1488,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_seopress_titles_title":"","_seopress_titles_desc":"","_seopress_robots_index":"","_seopress_robots_follow":"","_seopress_robots_imageindex":"","_seopress_robots_snippet":"","_seopress_robots_primary_cat":"294","_seopress_robots_breadcrumbs":"","_seopress_robots_freeze_modified_date":"","_seopress_robots_custom_modified_date":"","_seopress_robots_canonical":"","_seopress_social_fb_title":"","_seopress_social_fb_desc":"","_seopress_social_fb_img":"","_seopress_social_fb_img_attachment_id":0,"_seopress_social_fb_img_width":0,"_seopress_social_fb_img_height":0,"_seopress_social_twitter_title":"","_seopress_social_twitter_desc":"","_seopress_social_twitter_img":"","_seopress_social_twitter_img_attachment_id":0,"_seopress_social_twitter_img_width":0,"_seopress_social_twitter_img_height":0,"_seopress_redirections_value":"","_seopress_redirections_enabled":"","_seopress_redirections_enabled_regex":"","_seopress_redirections_logged_status":"","_seopress_redirections_param":"","_seopress_redirections_type":0,"_seopress_analysis_target_kw":"","_seopress_news_disabled":"","_seopress_video_disabled":"","_seopress_video":[],"_seopress_pro_schemas_manual":[],"_seopress_pro_rich_snippets_disable_all":"","_seopress_pro_rich_snippets_disable":[],"_seopress_pro_schemas":[],"iawp_total_views":0,"_djp_featured_image_mode":"full","footnotes":""},"categories":[{"term_id":294,"name":"Articles","slug":"articles-en","term_group":0,"term_taxonomy_id":294,"taxonomy":"category","description":"","parent":0,"count":100,"filter":"raw","cat_ID":294,"category_count":100,"category_description":"","cat_name":"Articles","category_nicename":"articles-en","category_parent":0},{"term_id":292,"name":"Dispute Resolution","slug":"dispute-resolution-en","term_group":0,"term_taxonomy_id":292,"taxonomy":"category","description":"","parent":0,"count":51,"filter":"raw","cat_ID":292,"category_count":51,"category_description":"","cat_name":"Dispute Resolution","category_nicename":"dispute-resolution-en","category_parent":0},{"term_id":291,"name":"General","slug":"general-en","term_group":0,"term_taxonomy_id":291,"taxonomy":"category","description":"","parent":0,"count":153,"filter":"raw","cat_ID":291,"category_count":153,"category_description":"","cat_name":"General","category_nicename":"general-en","category_parent":0}],"tags":[],"djp_center":[],"coauthors":[238],"class_list":["post-4909","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-articles-en","category-dispute-resolution-en","category-general-en"],"acf":{"djp_promote_now":false,"djp_promotion_days":7},"images":{"thumbnail":"https:\/\/djp.pl\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/05\/pexels-algrey-2792153-scaled-1-150x150.jpg","medium":"https:\/\/djp.pl\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/05\/pexels-algrey-2792153-scaled-1-300x265.jpg","medium_large":"https:\/\/djp.pl\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/05\/pexels-algrey-2792153-scaled-1-768x678.jpg","large":"https:\/\/djp.pl\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/05\/pexels-algrey-2792153-scaled-1-1024x904-djp-web.webp","full":"https:\/\/djp.pl\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/05\/pexels-algrey-2792153-scaled-1-djp-web.webp"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/djp.pl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4909","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/djp.pl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/djp.pl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/djp.pl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/djp.pl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4909"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/djp.pl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4909\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5554,"href":"https:\/\/djp.pl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4909\/revisions\/5554"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/djp.pl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1488"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/djp.pl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4909"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/djp.pl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4909"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/djp.pl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4909"},{"taxonomy":"djp_center","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/djp.pl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/djp_center?post=4909"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/djp.pl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=4909"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}