 |  |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|  | |  | |
Time summonses require particular treatment. Under the present system where
actions proceed without the framework of milestone dates or court-directed timetables,
a very large number of time summonses are taken out and need to be dealt with.
Parties sometimes take out several time summonses in respect of a single step in the
action. It is intended that this will significantly change under the proposed system.
(a)
As discussed above, where a self-executing order has been made, there will be
no question of time summonses being taken out to extend time to complete the
step in question. Failure to take it in time carries a pre-determined sanction
which might be avoided only if relief is granted to the party at fault - by no
means a routine occurrence.
(b)
Secondly, again as previously mentioned, save in the most exceptional
circumstances, applications for time extensions requiring or probably requiring
a milestone date to be moved will not be entertained.
(c)
Thirdly, the court will expect the parties to reach sensible agreements as to
workable time extensions which do not threaten milestone dates and is likely to
penalise in costs unnecessary applications by way of time summons.
(d)
If none of the above categories applies and if the parties are unable to reach
agreement on a time extension, the application would have to be dealt with
promptly by the court, the master having a discretion whether it is best dealt
with on a short hearing or on paper. A practice direction will be needed to set
out an appropriately simplified procedure for such applications.
The Working Party acknowledges that in some cases, unrepresented litigants may find
it difficult to formulate their submissions on paper. Where this is likely to be so, the
master ought to exercise his discretion against dealing with the matter purely on paper.
|
 |
|