 |  |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|  | |  | |
(a)
Starting with a realistic timetable
The timetable as initially set should, so far as possible, be realistic and workable so
that the parties can reasonably be held to its deadlines. The Working Party believes
that this can be achieved, bearing in mind the following matters :-
(a)
It will only be at the close of pleadings that the parties will have to work out the
directions needed and their associated timetable to be entered in the
questionnaire. They will be assisted in this task by having to hand the pleadings
– duly verified by statements of truth
– setting out each side's case and
identifying the disputed issues with some precision.
(b)
Sanctioned offers of settlement may well also have been made by then,
accompanied by a sufficient disclosure of the offeror's case to support the
financial consequences of the offer,
again contributing to a clear
understanding of the case.
(c)
The questionnaire, containing each party's information and estimates as to the
needs of the case, together with their proposals for directions and a timetable,
further ensures that both sides and the court will have a comprehensive
understanding of the issues and procedural needs of the case.
(d)
In making their timetabling proposals, the parties can be expected to have made
allowances for contingencies and aimed to give themselves ample time to meet
the time-limits
– an approach which the court would be happy to accept subject
only to its having a discretion to override manifestly unreasonable estimates and
proposals.
Notes
See Section 9 above.
See Section 11 above.
|
 |
|