It is permissible for a legal representative to sign a statement of truth in their client’s pleadings (with their client’s authority). A legal representative could not sign their client’s witness statement (the reason should be apparent). A legal representative also cannot sign a list of documents.
The latter, however, is something I have seen quite often. It makes me wonder why there could be a misapprehension as to why a legal representative thought they could sign a list of documents on behalf of their client.
This post considers this question.
Where a legal representative can sign statement of truth
Practice Direction 22 says the following:-
Where a party is legally represented, the legal representative may sign the statement of truth on their behalf. The statement signed by the legal representative will refer to the client’s belief, not their own. They must state the capacity in which they sign and the name of their firm where appropriate.
Paragraph 3.6
The definition of a legal representative is the same as that found in CPR 2.3(1), which is either a Barrister, Solicitor, Solicitor’s employee, manager of a body recognised under s9 of the Administration of Justice Act 1985 or a person (who for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007) is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes the conduct of litigation within the meaning of the act. For those interests, as a CILEX Litigator and Advocate in civil proceedings, I fall into the latter category.
Part 22 states that a legal representative can sign a statement of truth on behalf of their client. This will include a statement of truth on a claim form, pleadings, N244 application notice and Appellants’ Notice. The question is, where does that ability end?
Witness statements
It should be common sense that only a witness can sign the statement of truth in their witness statement. CPR 32.8 says that a witness statement must comply with the requirements set out in Practice Directions 32.
Practice Direction 32, paragraph 20.1 confirms that the witness statement is the equivalent of oral evidence, which the witness would, if called, give in evidence. It further affirms that ‘it must include a statement by the intended witness in their own language that they believe the facts in it are true‘.
What does this tell us? A legal representative could never sign a witness statement. Using the ‘equivalent of oral evidence’ example, a legal representative could not enter the witness box and swear/affirm that the witness’ evidence was true. If a statement of truth had to be in their own language and be about their own belief.
Practice Direction 32 prevents a legal representative from signing a witness’ witness statement.
Disclosure and Part 31
Part 31.10 explains that when parties are compelled to give standard disclosure, they should make and serve a list of documents in the ‘relevant practice form’. Part 31.10(5) requires the list to include a disclosure statement.
The critical element is Part 31.10(6), which states that the party disclosing the document will make the statement. One could argue that a legal representative could attest to the same because of Practice Direction 22, paragraph 3.6. The N265 List of Documents does not have the option for a legal representative to sign the list on behalf of the party:-
It is hard to envisage that the duty of disclosure, which is an essential duty, can be discharged by a legal representative on behalf of a party.
However….
CPR 31.10(9) causes doubt because:-
A disclosure statement may be made by a person who is not a party where this is permitted by a relevant practice direction.
This could allow a legal representative to sign a list of documents on behalf of a party. The White Book does not give that suggestion and states “an insurer or the Motor Insurers’ Bureau having a financial interest in proceedings brought by or against a party may sign a disclosure statement on behalf of that other party’ Practice Direction to Pt 31, para 4.7“.
Legal representatives who read CPR 31.10(9) may interpret it to mean they can sign on behalf of a party. They could be correct. The White Book is not infallible. However, the guidance about the disclosure statement does not suggest a legal representative can sign it.
Conclusion
Everything suggests a legal representative cannot sign a disclosure statement on behalf of a party. The White Book refers to Arrow Trading v Edwardian Group Ltd [2004] EWHC 1319, where it was made clear that a disclosure statement was not a mere technicality and was designed to ‘bring home’ to each party their disclosure responsibility. It would never sign a disclosure list on behalf of a party, and I believe any legal representative who does risk falling foul of the disclosure obligation.
Information
AJH Advocacy Limited, a Limited Company which is regulated by the Bar Standards Boards (entity number 190758), ceases trading on the 12th January 2026.
From the 12th January 2026 and onwards, Alec Hancock will practice as a Barrister at Magdalen Chambers in Exeter. For instructions on matters on or after 12th January 2026, please contact Magdalen Chambers via clerks@magdalenchambers.co.uk or by telephone on 01392 285 200.