Supreme Court Amendment (Miscellaneous) Rules 20112 March 2011
We, the Honourable Ewan Charles Crawford, Chief Justice, and the Honourable Peter Ethrington Evans, the Honourable Alan Michael Blow, OAM, the Honourable Shan Eve Tennent, the Honourable David James Porter and the Honourable Helen Mary Wood, Puisne Judges of the Supreme Court of Tasmania, on the recommendation of the Rule Committee, make the following Rules of Court under the Supreme Court Civil Procedure Act 1932 .
These Rules of Court may be cited as the Supreme Court Amendment (Miscellaneous) Rules 2011 .
These Rules of Court take affect on the thirtieth day after the day on which their making is notified in the Gazette.
In these Rules of Court, the Supreme Court Rules 2000 are referred to as the Principal Rules.
4. Rule 414A inserted
After rule 414 of the Principal Rules , the following rule is inserted in Division 1:414A. Purpose of case management
The overarching purpose of case management is to ensure that proceedings are conducted and resolved justly and efficiently.
5. Rule 415 amended (Directions hearing)
Rule 415 of the Principal Rules is amended by omitting subrules (2) , (3) and (4) and substituting the following subrules:(2) The purpose of a directions hearing is to eliminate any lapse of time, from the commencement of a proceeding to its final determination, that is not reasonably required for –(a) the fair and just determination of the outstanding issues between the parties; and(b) the preparation of the case for trial.(3) A judge may make any order, as part of a directions hearing, to ensure that the proceeding is conducted and resolved justly and efficiently.(4) Without affecting the generality of subrule (3) , the judge may, when making an order under that subrule, take into account any matters relevant to the proceeding, including the following matters:(a) the most suitable manner in which to deal with the proceeding, in a way that is proportionate to –(i) the amount of money involved; and(ii) the importance of the proceeding; and(iii) the complexity of the issues; and(iv) the financial position of each party;(b) the most efficient manner in which to deal with the proceeding which will not prevent the fair and just resolution of the dispute;(c) the allocation of court resources taking into account other demands imposed on those resources by other proceedings.(4A) Without affecting the generality of subrule (3) , an order made under that subrule may –(a) be inconsistent with, or dispense with or vary, any provisions of the rules in their application to the proceeding; and(b) require the filing and service of statements of contentions including the material facts, the relief claimed, the grounds for that relief and responses thereto; and(c) limit the bringing of interlocutory applications to those certified by a practitioner, or determined by a judge, as having a reasoned likelihood that the determination of the application will be productive in the just and efficient overall disposition of the proceeding; and(d) require a practitioner to certify whether or not he or she has issued detailed written advice to his or her client –(i) reciting the facts as known at that point in time; and(ii) stating concisely the legal principles that apply; and(iii) identifying issues of fact that are in dispute or are likely to be in dispute; and(iv) identifying issues of law which are, or may be, controversial as to their application to the facts; and(v) setting out the likely timetable for the conduct of the litigation; and(vi) stating the likely cost of the litigation; and(vii) providing a reasoned opinion as to the risks associated with the proceeding; and(viii) mentioning the non-litigious avenues for dispute resolution which are reasonably available to the client; and(e) refer the proceeding, or a matter arising in the proceeding, to mediation; and(f) impose, or dispense with, limitations on the procedures for interrogation and the discovery of documents; and(g) require the filing and service of witness lists and statements; and(h) impose a timetable which ensures that the proceeding will be ready to be heard as soon as possible; and(i) require a practitioner to forewarn his or her opposing parties of any likely non-compliance with rules or orders; and(j) appoint a trial date; and(k) limit the number of expert witnesses at a trial; and(l) require the trial of any issue of fact or law before any other issue of fact or law is dealt with.
6. Rule 668 amended (Appeal books)
Rule 668(6)(b) of the Principal Rules is amended by omitting "be on one side only of the paper, with" and substituting "have".
E. C. CRAWFORD
Chief Justice
P. E. EVANS
Puisne Judge
A. M. BLOW
Puisne Judge
S. E. TENNENT
Puisne Judge
D. J. PORTER
Puisne Judge
H. M. WOOD
Puisne Judge
Countersigned,
E. A. KNIGHT
Registrar
Displayed and numbered in accordance with the Rules Publication Act 1953.
Notified in the Gazette on 9 March 2011
These Rules of Court are administered in the Department of Justice.
EXPLANATORY NOTE
(This note is not part of the rule)
These Rules of Court amend the Supreme Court Rules 2000 by –(a) clarifying the purpose of, and the powers of certain persons in relation to, directions hearings; and(b) removing the requirement for appeal books to be printed single-sided.