Hearsay evidence

A secondhand account — a text message, a written quote, an absent witness's statement — is not shut out of a small claims hearing the way it might be elsewhere, because the small claims track is not bound by the strict rules of evidence.

Can I use a text message from someone who will not come to the hearing as evidence?

Generally yes, in the small claims track. CPR 27.8 means the court is not bound by the strict rules of evidence and can decide what evidence it needs and how it is given, so a text message, written quote, or email from someone who is not attending can be put before the court even though it is hearsay. The judge will still weigh how reliable it is — who sent it, when, and whether it can be checked against anything else — but it is not automatically excluded the way it might be treated more cautiously in a trial on a higher track.

Does hearsay evidence count for as much as evidence given in person?

Not automatically, and this is the trade-off. The relaxed small claims evidence rule under CPR 27.8 lets hearsay in, but it does not require the judge to give it the same weight as a witness answering questions in the room. The other side can point out that the person was not there to be questioned on it, and the judge weighs that when deciding how much to rely on it, alongside everything else in the case.

Do I still need to tell the other side about a written statement I plan to rely on?

Yes. Even on the small claims track, fairness and the overriding objective mean you should not ambush the other side with evidence they have not seen in advance — the court will usually direct that witness statements and documents are exchanged before the hearing, and producing something for the first time on the day risks the judge giving it less weight, or adjourning to let the other side respond.

Is the Civil Evidence Act 1995 the same rule as the small claims relaxation?

No, though they point the same way. The Civil Evidence Act 1995 sets the general position for all civil proceedings: hearsay is not automatically excluded just because it is hearsay, subject to notice requirements and the court's assessment of weight. CPR 27.8 is a separate, small-claims-specific rule that goes further, freeing the court from the strict rules of evidence generally and letting it adopt whatever fair method of proceeding it thinks appropriate, not just on hearsay.

Can the other side cross-examine a witness statement from someone who is not there?

Not in the usual sense of questioning the person directly, because they are not present. What the other side can do is comment on the statement's reliability — raise points about why the absent person might be wrong, mistaken, or have reason to favour one side — and the judge takes that into account when deciding what weight to give it, alongside their own questions about the document or statement itself.

Should I still bring a witness to the hearing if I can?

Yes, where you reasonably can. The relaxed hearsay rule is a safety net for evidence you genuinely cannot get live — a witness who has moved abroad, or a shop that will only confirm something in writing — not a reason to skip asking someone to attend when they are available. A witness who is physically present and can answer questions is almost always stronger evidence than the same person's written account, even on the small claims track.

The general rule, and the small claims relaxation on top of it

Hearsay evidence is a statement made otherwise than by a witness giving their own oral evidence at the hearing, offered as proof of the facts it describes — a friend reporting what someone else told them, a written quote from a tradesperson who is not attending, or a text message sent between two people neither of whom is the person relying on it in court. Historically the common law treated hearsay with deep suspicion, because the person who actually made the original statement cannot be questioned about it.

The Civil Evidence Act 1995 changed the general position across all civil proceedings: hearsay is not excluded from civil proceedings purely on the ground that it is hearsay. It still comes with notice requirements and, crucially, the court decides what weight to give it — a secondhand account that cannot be tested is usually worth less than first-hand evidence from someone who can be questioned on it.

The small claims track goes further still. CPR 27.8 says the court is not bound by the strict rules of evidence at all; it may adopt any method of proceeding it considers fair, hearings are informal, the court need not take evidence under oath, and it can limit cross-examination. This is a deliberate design choice for a track built around proportionate, low-cost justice for claims up to £10,000 — most litigants on it have no legal representation, and insisting on the same evidential formality used in a High Court trial would make the track unworkable for the people it exists to serve.

What this means in practice for a self-representing claimant

The practical effect is real and usually helpful to someone running their own case. A text message exchange, a WhatsApp conversation, an email, or a written quote can be put before the judge even though the person who sent it is not there to be cross-examined — something that would face much stricter scrutiny on the fast track or in the High Court. A written account from someone who genuinely cannot attend — because they have moved away, are unwell, or the cost of bringing them is out of proportion to a small claim — can carry real weight rather than being shut out entirely.

The usual way to put this kind of evidence before the court is a signed witness statement from the absent person, explaining what they know and, ideally, why they cannot attend in person. The statement should still be prepared properly — dated, signed, and setting out the facts in the person's own words — because the judge is assessing its reliability, not simply accepting it because the rules allow it in at all.

The trade-off is that the other side is entitled to comment on the reliability of evidence they could not test by questioning the person who gave it. A judge weighing a written account from someone who did not attend will usually ask whether that absence was genuinely unavoidable, whether the statement is consistent with everything else in the case, and whether there is any reason to doubt it — and will say so in giving reasons for the decision, which CPR 27.8 specifically requires.

Where the relaxed rule does not help

The relaxation is not a reason to skip bringing a witness who is genuinely available. Live evidence that can be questioned is almost always treated as stronger than the same person's written account, even though the written version is technically admissible. The rule exists as a safety net for evidence that cannot reasonably be obtained any other way, not an invitation to avoid the inconvenience of arranging for a willing witness to turn up.

It also does not remove the basic fairness obligations that sit underneath the overriding objective. Even informally, a party should disclose the written evidence it intends to rely on before the hearing, not produce it for the first time on the day — ambushing the other side with new material risks the judge giving it less weight, or adjourning the hearing to let the other side respond properly, which defeats the purpose of a quick, proportionate small claims process in the first place.

A claimant hired a removal firm, and a friend who helped supervise the move saw the firm's driver drop and damage a wardrobe. The friend has since relocated to Spain and cannot realistically attend a UK small claims hearing for a £400 claim. The claimant asks the friend to write and sign a statement describing exactly what they saw.

Written witness statement, absent witness

General civil position (Civil Evidence Act 1995)

Admissible, weight assessed by the court

Small claims rule (CPR 27.8)

Strict rules of evidence do not apply

Statement can be put before the court and given weight

The defendant cannot cross-examine the friend directly, and can point out to the judge that the account has not been tested in person. But because the absence is genuinely unavoidable and the statement is detailed and signed, the judge can still give it real weight when deciding what happened — something that would be far less certain on a track with stricter evidential rules.

Overriding objective

Civil Evidence Act 1995

Civil Procedure Rules, rule 27.8

Practice Direction 27

Hearsay Evidence in Small Claims — Glossary

What hearsay evidence is, why the small claims track is not bound by the strict rules of evidence under CPR 27.8, and how to put an absent witness's account before the court.