Form N263 Disclosure Report: How to Complete It (CPR 31.5)

At a glance

• What it is: Form N263, the disclosure report — a written account of what documents may exist, where they are, and what disclosure order a party thinks the court should make.
• Who files it: Every party to the claim files and serves their own report, not one joint document.
• Deadline: Not less than 14 days before the first case management conference, verified by a statement of truth (CPR 31.5(3)).
• Which claims it applies to: CPR 31.5(2) applies the report requirement to intermediate and multi-track claims — but not to claims which include a claim for personal injuries (a category that includes clinical negligence), unless the court orders otherwise.
• A live discrepancy to know about: GOV.UK's current form guidance says the form is only needed "for cases in the multi-track," which does not mention the intermediate track added to the rule in October 2023 — check your directions rather than relying on the form page alone.
• Pre-CMC discussion: Not less than 7 days before the first CMC, the parties must discuss and try to agree a disclosure proposal (CPR 31.5(5)).
• The court's menu: At the CMC the court chooses from six possible disclosure orders under CPR 31.5(7), from dispensing with disclosure entirely through to full standard disclosure.
• Electronic documents: If an Electronic Documents Questionnaire (Form N264) has been exchanged, file it together with the report (CPR 31.5(4)).

What Form N263 is and why it exists

A disclosure report is a written account of the documents relevant to a claim and how a party proposes to deal with them. It is required, in claims where CPR 31.5 applies, so that the court and the other parties can see what is being proposed before any directions about disclosure are made at the first case management conference (CMC).

Rather than leaving the question of disclosure until the last minute, each party describes, in its own report:

• the categories of documents that may exist and be relevant to the issues in dispute;
• where and with whom those documents are likely to be held;
• how any electronic material is stored;
• a broad estimate of what it would cost to give standard disclosure; and
• which of the court's menu of disclosure orders that party wants the court to make.

Each party files its own report — it is not a joint document, although the parties are separately required to try to agree a common position before the CMC (see below).

Who has to file one — and who's excluded

CPR 31.5(2) states that, unless the court orders otherwise, the disclosure report requirement (along with the pre-CMC discussion duty and the disclosure order menu) applies to all intermediate and multi-track claims, other than those which include a claim for personal injuries.

That exclusion is easy to get backwards. CPR rule 2.3 defines "personal injuries" broadly — it includes any disease and any impairment of a person's physical or mental condition — and clinical negligence claims fall squarely within that definition. In practice this means:

• Claims that include a claim for personal injury or clinical negligence are not required to go through the CPR 31.5 disclosure report process, and instead usually proceed under the court's own standard directions for those claim types.
• Claims that don't involve personal injury — contract disputes, professional negligence, property and boundary disputes, commercial claims, and similar — do normally need a disclosure report if they are allocated to the intermediate or multi-track.
• The court retains a general power to order a disclosure report even in an excluded claim, so don't assume it will never be required just because the claim involves personal injury.
• Claims subject to the separate disclosure regime for the Business and Property Courts sit outside CPR 31.5 altogether and follow their own rules.

If you are unsure whether your claim falls inside or outside the report requirement, the safest step is to check the directions the court has already given, or ask the court office, rather than guessing from the general description of your claim.

A live gap in the official guidance

CPR 31.5(2) was updated to extend to the intermediate track, introduced in October 2023 for claims that sit between the fast track and the multi-track in value and complexity. GOV.UK's form guidance for Form N263, however, currently states only that "you only need this form for cases in the multi-track." That form-level guidance appears not to have caught up with the rule text. If your claim is on the intermediate track, treat the rule itself — not the older form description — as the authority, and confirm the position for your specific case with the court.

What must go in the report

CPR 31.5(3) sets out five things the disclosure report must cover, and it must be verified by a statement of truth:

1. A description of what documents exist or may exist that are or may be relevant to the issues in the case.
2. Where and with whom those documents are, or may be, located — for example, in a party's own files, with a third party such as an accountant or contractor, or on a shared system.
3. How any electronic documents are stored — email systems, cloud platforms, individual devices, backup systems, and so on.
4. A broad estimate of the costs of giving standard disclosure, including the cost of searching for and disclosing electronically stored documents.
5. Which disclosure order the party wants the court to make — that is, which of the options under CPR 31.5(7) it is asking for.

Electronic documents and Form N264

Where a meaningful volume of electronic material is involved, the parties may separately exchange an Electronic Documents Questionnaire (Form N264), made under Practice Direction 31B. CPR 31.5(4) says that where the questionnaire has been exchanged, it should be filed together with the disclosure report. N264 goes into more technical detail than N263 — describing how electronic documents are held, who has access, retention and deletion policies, and any technical obstacles such as legacy systems.

The pre-CMC discussion: seven days out

Filing the report is not the end of the parties' obligations. CPR 31.5(5) requires that, not less than seven days before the first case management conference, the parties must discuss — at a meeting or by telephone — and try to agree a disclosure proposal that meets the overriding objective of dealing with cases justly and at proportionate cost.

If the parties do reach agreement and the court considers the agreed proposal appropriate, CPR 31.5(6) allows the court to approve it without a hearing, saving the time and cost of arguing disclosure out at the CMC. Disagreement between the parties is the most common reason disclosure ends up being contested in front of the judge.

The court's menu of disclosure orders

At the first or any subsequent CMC, the court decides which disclosure order to make, having regard to the overriding objective and the need to limit disclosure to what is necessary to deal with the case justly. CPR 31.5(7) sets out six options:

| Option | What it means | |---|---| | Dispensing with disclosure | No disclosure order is made at all. | | Disclose documents relied on | A party discloses only the documents it relies on, and may separately request specific documents from the other side. | | Issue-by-issue disclosure | Disclosure is limited to particular issues in the case, where practicable. | | "Train of enquiry" disclosure | Each party discloses documents it is reasonable to suppose may help its own case, damage another party's case, or lead to an enquiry with either effect. | | Standard disclosure | The traditional test under CPR 31.6 — documents relied on, and documents that adversely affect a party's own case, adversely affect another party's case, or support another party's case. | | Any other order | The court can craft a bespoke order it considers appropriate to the case. |

The disclosure report's proposal (see item 5 above) is where each party makes its case for one of these options — and the court will weigh those proposals, along with anything agreed at the seven-day discussion, before deciding.

Once an order for standard disclosure is made, CPR 31.6 defines what must actually be disclosed: documents a party relies on, documents that adversely affect its own case, documents that adversely affect or support another party's case, and anything a relevant practice direction separately requires.

How the court directs disclosure to be carried out

Separately from choosing which type of order to make, CPR 31.5(8) lets the court give further directions at any point about how disclosure is to be given, including:

• what searches must be carried out — of what, by whom, covering which time periods, and how far electronic searches must go;
• whether formal lists of documents are required;
• how and when the disclosure statement (the certified account of the search that was carried out) must be given;
• the format documents must be disclosed in;
• what a party must say about documents that once existed but no longer do; and
• whether disclosure should happen in stages rather than all at once.

How to complete Form N263: step by step

1. Check whether the report is required for your claim. Confirm the case has been allocated to the intermediate or multi-track, and check that it doesn't include a claim for personal injury or clinical negligence, which is excluded under CPR 31.5(2) unless the court orders otherwise.
2. Identify categories of documents and where they live. Work through the issues in dispute and list the categories of documents that may be relevant — correspondence, contracts, internal notes, invoices, and material held by third parties. For each, note where it is likely to be stored and in what format.
3. Describe your electronic documents properly. Explain how electronic material is held and by whom, and flag any technical issues — legacy systems, deleted data, or third-party platforms. Consider whether an Electronic Documents Questionnaire (Form N264) should also be exchanged and filed alongside the report.
4. Give a broad cost estimate. The rule asks for a broad range, not a precise figure — but it should be a genuinely considered range, covering the time to search, review for relevance and privilege, and deal with electronic material.
5. Propose a disclosure order. State which of the six options under CPR 31.5(7) you are asking the court to make, and why — linking your proposal to the value of the claim, the issues genuinely in dispute, and your cost estimate.
6. Verify the report with a statement of truth, and file and serve it not less than 14 days before the first CMC.
7. Diarise the seven-day discussion. Contact the other side (or their representative) in good time to hold the pre-CMC discussion required by CPR 31.5(5), and try to reach an agreed proposal before the CMC.

Worked example: a modest contract dispute

Consider a fictional example. A small business is suing a supplier for breach of contract over defective goods, and the claim has been allocated to the intermediate track. Because the claim doesn't include any personal injury element, the disclosure report requirement applies.

The claimant's report might describe: the written contract and purchase orders (held on the company's accounting software); email correspondence with the supplier about the defects (held in the sales director's mailbox and a shared inbox); internal quality-control notes made when the goods were inspected (a mixture of paper notes and photographs on a manager's phone); and correspondence with an independent inspector who examined a sample of the goods (held by the inspector, a third party).

The report would give a broad range for the cost of searching these sources and reviewing what's found, and would propose an order — here, most likely standard disclosure under CPR 31.5(7)(e), given the claim turns on a manageable number of specific documents rather than a large unstructured data set.

If the estimate is wrong, or documents are missed

The cost estimate in the report is only ever a broad range, so some variation from the eventual figure is expected. But if the actual cost comes out well outside that range, be ready to explain why — the court and the other side are entitled to take the figure seriously when later deciding what's proportionate.

The duty of disclosure does not end once the list is served. CPR 31.11 makes clear it continues throughout the proceedings — if a document that should have been disclosed comes to a party's attention later, that party must notify the other side immediately. And under CPR 31.21, a party generally cannot rely on a document at trial that it failed to disclose or allow inspection of, unless the court gives permission. Getting the initial search right, and keeping it under review, matters more than getting a perfect cost figure.

What to do next

1. Confirm your track and check the personal injury exclusion. Look at your directions or ask the court whether your claim is on the intermediate or multi-track, and whether it includes a personal injury or clinical negligence element that takes it outside CPR 31.5.
2. Start your document mapping early. Categories, locations, and formats take longer to pin down than most people expect, especially where third parties or electronic systems are involved.
3. Reach out to the other side well before the seven-day deadline. The discussion CPR 31.5(5) requires works far better when it isn't left to the last minute.
4. File and serve on time, 14 days before the CMC, with a proper statement of truth.
5. If your case is unusual or document-heavy, get guidance early. Scope and cost proposals set the tone for the rest of the litigation, and it's far easier to get input before the report is filed than to unpick a poorly scoped order afterwards.

This guide provides general information about Form N263 and the disclosure report process under the Civil Procedure Rules for England and Wales. It is not legal advice and is not a substitute for advice tailored to your specific circumstances. The law described was accurate as at July 2026 and is subject to change — always check GOV.UK and legislation.gov.uk for the most current position.

Last reviewed: July 2026 by a non-practising solicitor · Next review due: July 2027 or on legislative change.