CPR and Overriding Objective (W2)

Question 1

CPR 1.1 - Overriding Objective

Answer 1

‘enabling the court to deal with cases justly and at proportionate cost.’

Question 2

CPR 1.1 - What does ‘dealing with a case justly and at proportionate cost’ include?

Answer 2

(a) ensuring that the parties are on equal footing, can participate fully in proceedings and parties & witnesses can give their best evidence
(b) saving expense
(c) dealing with the case in ways which are proportionate to (i) amount of money involved, (ii) importance , (iii) to complexity , (iv) financial position of the parties
(d) ensuring it is dealt with expeditiously and fairly
(e) allotting to it an appropriate share of the court’s resources
(f) enforcing compliance with rules, PDs and orders

Question 3

CPR 1.2, 1.3, 1.4 - Who must give effect to the overriding objective?

Answer 3

• The court must give effect to the overriding objective when it exercises any power given to it by the CPR or interprets any rule (1.2)
• The court must further the overriding objective by actively managing cases. (1.4)
• The parties are required to help the court to further the overriding objective. (1.3)

Question 4

CPR 1.4 - What does ‘active case management’ include?

Answer 4

(a) encouraging the parties to co-operate;
(b) identifying issues early;
(c) deciding promptly which issues require full investigation and disposing summarily of the others;
(d) deciding order in which issues are to be resolved;
(e) encouraging parties to use ADR and facilitating ADR;
(f) helping the parties to settle;
(g) fixing timetables/controlling progress;
(h) considering whether benefits of steps justify costs;
(i) dealing with as many aspects as possible on the same occasion;
(j) dealing with the case without parties needing to attend at court;
(k) making use of technology; and
(l) giving directions to ensure trial of a case proceeds efficiently and quickly

Question 5

PD 1.4.4 - What does co-operation not include?

Answer 5

Co-operation does not require a party to remind their opponent to comply with a procedural time limit e.g Higgins v ERC: held that D was under no duty to remind C of the need to serve the claim form.

Question 6

PD 1.4.9 - Discretion to stay claims which are brought in breach of an agreement between parties to attempt to resolve dispute by expert determination

Answer 6

A presumption in favour of the discretion being exercised to stay proceedings. The burden lies on the party resisting the stay to persuade the court there is good reason for no stay to be imposed.