 |  |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|  | |  | |
(b)
Recommendations
In the light of the responses received and given the case management powers already
contained in the RHC, the Working Party recommends against adopting Proposals 25
and 26. Practitioners and the courts should instead be encouraged to use existing RHC
powers to fashion a discovery regime suitable to the needs of the particular case
– preferably by agreement, but otherwise by order. Instead of cases being routinely
allowed to proceed to full automatic Peruvian Guano discovery, it ought to become
standard practice to consider whether any economising modifications should be made
to the scope and manner of meeting the parties' discovery obligations. A practice
direction in suitable terms should be issued and a question prompting such economies
should be included in the timetabling questionnaire.
Recommendation 72: Proposal 25 (for adopting "standard discovery") and
Proposal 26 (for prescribing a "reasonable search" standard) should not be
adopted, retaining the existing Peruvian Guano principles as the primary
measure of the parties' discovery obligations.
Recommendation 73: A practice direction should be issued and the
timetabling questionnaire designed with a view to encouraging the parties to
achieve economies in the discovery process by agreement; and to encouraging
the courts, in appropriate cases, to give directions with the same aim.
Notes
See Recommendation 53.
|
 |
|