Trial Process In Civil Proceedings- Scheduling Conference
Scheduling ConferenceThe trial process begins with a scheduling conference . The suit is set down for scheduling where the parties together with their counsel if represented are served with hearing notices from court for scheduling. They appear before a judge who on a preliminary inquires from the parties if there are any matters or facts on which they agree. The parties then set out those matters on which they do not agree for instance the defendant may be claiming to be a Real Estate holder which the defendant denies. Those points on which the parties differ and on which they desire a decision are listed and made the subject of scheduling.
It may so happen that the facts agreed upon dispose of the matter, for example ownership or if it is found that there is no lease agreement , and then the court does not have to determine any matter. If there are questions which require the court’s determination, the court will proceed to set down the suit for hearing. It will proceed to appoint a hearing date. This hearing is what is commonly referred to as a trial.
Settlement Of Issues
The trial will begin by settlement of issues, that is, determining the material propositions of law and fact affirmed by one party and denied by the other. These may be issues of law or fact. When issues of law are raised, then the court has to deal with issues of law first. For instance a party may raise the issue of limitation which means that a party is pleading the Limitation Act and the court need not try the other factual issues. If the action is good in law, the court will proceed to determine the issues of fact. The plaintiff has the right to begin where there are no objections to process.
Calling Of Witnesses
The plaintiff will begin by calling his or her witnesses, presenting his or her evidence for proof in court. That evidence is given by examining witnesses through the examination in chief. Questions are asked of each witness. They should not be leading questions. There should be no hearsay evidence. If one relies on documents, the witnesses should produce the documents to the court. The person competent to adduce the evidence should come up and adduce that evidence.
Having completed the examination in chief, it is the turn of the defendant to cross examine the plaintiff’s witnesses for the purpose of testing their veracity. This will also involve asking questions which bring out facts which have been left from the knowledge of the court. The plaintiff may re-examine his witness to water down facts from cross examination.
The plaintiff on completing his evidence will close his case. If he does not do so the court will order him to do so. It will then be the defendant’s turn to open his defense by calling witnesses to counter the evidence adduced by the plaintiff. In the same way, the defendant chief examines, the plaintiff cross examines and the defendant re-examines.
If the counsel re-examines a witness and he or she is uncooperative, then he may ask court to declare him hostile and then cross examines him. When the defendant closes, the plaintiff opens up by submitting orally or written submissions with the consent of the court. The plaintiff submits on points of law and fact. He raises legal issues and resolves them. He is in essence saying that he has discharged the burden imposed on him and the court should give judgment to him.
That said and done, the defendant also submits. He will submit summarizing a case, making factual and legal submissions. After the defendant’s submission, the plaintiff will exercise his right of reply. Having done so, the parties close their respective cases and that is the end of the hearing process.
Tags : Civil Procedure