[2025] EWHC 2126 (Comm)

First, the claim form as issued within 28 days must be capable of standing on its own as a “complete, particularised statement of the case to be advanced”: See section O3.2 of the Commercial Court Guide, and CPR r.62.4(1)(b). As Andrew Baker J said in Orascom TMT Investments Sàrl v VEON Limited [2018] EWHC 985 (Comm), at [5] (my emphasis):

“It is, with respect, insufficient in my judgment, although a common practice, merely to say in the Claim Form, beyond identifying the bare statutory essentials, that reference should be made to the supporting witness evidence. Witness statements served in support of a section 68 claim should contain evidence, not comment or argument. They are not the proper vehicle for setting out the analytical case to be advanced before the court; that should properly be done by way of statement of case. In circumstances where the procedure for section 68 challenges, as for that matter section 67 challenges, does not involve, unless specifically ordered in a particular case, an exchange of statements of case separate to the Claim Form, the Claim Form has to serve that purpose.”

The same is true in respect of a s.72 challenge, given it is made by way of service of an N8 Claim Form.