THE DIFFICULTIES IN CONDUCTING YOUR OWN LITIGATION OR SMALL CLAIM

Conducting litigation (even small claims) without professional representation in England, whether as an individual or a business, presents a range of daunting challenges. While the right to appear as a litigant in person (LiP) is well established, the practical realities of navigating the system unaided can be severe. The English legal system is rooted in centuries of precedent and layered procedural rules. For the unrepresented party, these complexities quickly become overwhelming.

One of the foremost difficulties is the intricate web of procedural requirements. Civil litigation is governed by the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR), which set out strict timetables, formatting requirements, disclosure obligations, and evidential rules. To lawyers, these are part of everyday practice, but for a layperson or business representative they often appear impenetrable. Even apparently simple steps—such as issuing a claim form, serving documents correctly, or drafting a statement of case—require precise compliance. Missing a deadline or misunderstanding a rule can result in sanctions, costs penalties, or even the striking out of a claim or defence. Unlike in other areas of life where minor errors can be corrected, the courts are often unforgiving when procedural obligations are not met.

Closely linked to this is the sheer harshness of the litigation environment. Judges are obliged to apply the rules impartially and cannot act as an advocate for an unrepresented party. While judges may show some patience with LiPs, they will not provide substantive legal advice or overlook non-compliance. This means that individuals and businesses find themselves held to the same standards as qualified lawyers. The asymmetry becomes even starker when the opposing party is legally represented. Solicitors and barristers are trained not only in the law but in litigation strategy, ensuring their clients’ cases are framed advantageously. Against such expertise, the self-represented often feel disadvantaged from the outset.

Another significant problem is the lack of accessible, real-world assistance. While court guides and online resources exist, they tend to be written in technical language and assume a baseline familiarity with legal concepts. Free or low-cost legal advice is limited and often oversubscribed, with legal aid largely unavailable for most civil disputes. Businesses, in particular, usually fall outside the scope of any subsidised support. As a result, litigants must try to bridge the gap themselves, often relying on fragmented online forums or generic templates, which rarely meet the nuanced demands of their specific case.

The emotional and practical burden cannot be understated. Litigation requires not just knowledge of the law but the ability to present arguments clearly, manage evidence, correspond with the court and the opponent, and prepare for hearings. For individuals, this can be exhausting and intimidating; for businesses, it diverts time and resources away from commercial activity. Stress is compounded by the high stakes: adverse costs orders, judgments that may threaten livelihoods, and reputational harm.

In short, while the English legal system prides itself on fairness and impartiality, it is built on a foundation that assumes professional representation. For those who attempt to navigate it alone, the intricacies of procedure, the scarcity of practical guidance, and the unforgiving nature of the rules combine to make self-representation an uphill battle. Far from empowering litigants, the system often leaves them exposed to serious risks and severe consequences.