 |  |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|  | |  | |
16.4
Case managing discovery
Proposal 29
The court should be expected to exercise its case management powers with a view to
tailoring an appropriate discovery regime for the case at hand. It should have a residual
discretion both to direct what discovery is required - to narrow or widen the scope of
discovery required, to include, if necessary and proportionate, full Peruvian Guano style
discovery - and in what way discovery is to be given.
consensus that the excesses of discovery ought to be tackled by appropriate case
management by the courts. The balance of opinion favoured taking full Peruvian
Guano discovery as the starting point, to be narrowed by appropriate case
management, rather than (as Proposal 29 suggests) starting from "standard discovery"
and deciding when to widen its scope. No further discussion is called for in the light
of the foregoing Recommendations.
Recommendation 80: Proposal 29 (for the case management of discovery by
the courts) should be adopted, but with Peruvian Guano principles as the
primary measure of discovery, taken as the starting-point for such case
management.
|
 |
|