Overriding objective
Disputes & Litigation

There is one rule which dominates all other civil procedure rules which govern how the civil courts of England and Wales operate namely, the court must deal with cases justly. If another procedural rule is considered by the court to conflict with the overriding objective, the overriding objective will prevail.

Dealing justly with a case includes, as far as is practicable:

(a) "ensuring that the parties are on an equal footing": This does not mean that parties are not entitled to choose their own legal representation with the more affluent party selecting more prestigious representation but the equal footing will kick in when it comes to awarding costs and applications to amend etc at which point the court will seek to level the playing field;

(b) "saving expense": The court will bear in mind offers to settle and cooperation when it comes to awarding costs and interest;

(c) "dealing with the case in ways which are proportionate –

(i) to the amount of money involved;

(ii) to the importance of the case;

iii) to the complexity of the issues; and

(iv) to the financial position of each party"

This is the motivation behind the three different tracks - small claims, fast and multi tracks which are governed by different rules.

(d) "ensuring that it is dealt with expeditiously and fairly"; and

(e) "allotting to it an appropriate share of the court’s resources, while taking into account the need to allot resources to other cases".

There is an obligation on parties to assist the court in furthering the overriding objective including informing it of any agreements to settle or that the matter is unlikely to proceed so that the court does not waste time on a matter which is not going to proceed.

The court has duty to actively manage cases so that are dealt with justly. The Civil Procedure Rules set out that this active management includes:

(a) encouraging the parties to co-operate with each other in the conduct of the proceedings. This is manifested by the requirement to follow the pre-action protocols before resorting to litigation and the sanctions that are imposed if they are not followed;

(b) identifying the issues at an early stage;

(c) deciding promptly which issues need full investigation and trial and accordingly disposing summarily of the others;

(d) deciding the order in which issues are to be resolved;

(e) encouraging the parties to use an alternative dispute resolution procedure if the court considers that appropriate and facilitating the use of such procedure;

(f) helping the parties to settle the whole or part of the case;

(g) fixing timetables or otherwise controlling the progress of the case;

(h) considering whether the likely benefits of taking a particular step justify the cost of taking it;

(i) dealing with as many aspects of the case as it can on the same occasion;

(j) dealing with the case without the parties needing to attend at court;

(k) making use of technology; and

(l) giving directions to ensure that the trial of a case proceeds quickly and efficiently.

It is important that the philosophy of the overriding objective is borne in mind at all stages of litigation and that lawyers and clients to do not become so caught up in the fight that it is overlooked, otherwise the court may impose sanctions and justice may not be served.