If a matter is not resolved and requires the input of the courts, it is quite common for the court to be involved on multiple occasions before trial, the most common being to make decisions about applications that have been made by the parties to any dispute.
Applications can be made for a number of reasons during a case – to ask for permission from the Court for more time, to ask the Court to make a party to proceedings do something, or for many other reasons. Applications can therefore be useful in the course of litigation, especially if the court is needed to make an urgent decision before the main trial.
When making applications to the court, they can be made “on notice” or “without notice” (ex parte).
On Notice Applications
Usually, applications made in the course of court proceedings are made “on notice”. The Respondent to the application is served with the application before the application is determined by the Court, and given the chance to take part by responding and attending any hearing that is set for the application.
Without Notice Applications
These are usually reserved for more serious issues, where the Applicant would be put at a disadvantage if the Respondent is forewarned. The Respondent knows nothing of the application until after the issue at the subject of the application has been determined by the Court.
The most common applications made Without Notice are:
- Interim injunctions, in particular freezing injunctions and search orders
- Applications for permission to serve outside the jurisdiction
- Anti-suit injunctions
An application made without notice is an attempt to receive a court order without allowing the respondent to see the application and/or evidence in support and to respond and/or object accordingly. This is far from the usual “cards on the table” stance of the court; the court will therefore treat any without notice application with caution, however are aware that in certain more serious circumstances, it would not make sense for the Responding party to be given a warning of the application being made.
For example, in freezing injunction applications, whereby the applicant is asking the Court to “freeze” their opponents’ assets so that they cannot dispose of them quickly and put them out of everyone’s reach, it would make no sense to give a prior warning of the application.
The rules surrounding applications and how they should be made are found in the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR), with the general rules being at CPR23. January 8 2026
Griffin Law is a dispute resolution firm comprising innovative, proactive, tenacious and commercially-minded lawyers. We pride ourselves on our close client relationships, which are uniquely enhanced by our transparent fee guarantee and a commitment to share the risks of litigation. For more details of our services please email justice@griffin.law or call 01732 52 59 23.
GRIFFIN LAW – TRANSPARENT FEES. TENACIOUS LAWYERS. TRUSTED PARTNERS.
Nothing in this document constitutes any form of legal advice upon which any person can place any form of reliance of any kind whatsoever. We expressly disclaim, and you hereby irrevocably agree to waive, all or any liability of any kind whatsoever, whether in contract, tort or otherwise, to you or any other person who may read or otherwise come to learn of anything covered or referred to in this document. In the event that you wish to take any action in connection with the subject matter of this document, you should obtain legal advice before doing so.
