Who will represent me at a High Court Motion hearing for Discovery of Documents

parent

I am in the process of taking a Personal Injuries Case against my employer. My solicitor has requested discovery of certain documents and this request has been ignored by my employers solicitors. In order to obtain these documents my solicitor has applied to the courts for this information and the hearing is shortly. Who will represent me at this hearing i.e. solicitor? junior counsel? or senior counsel? My solicitor has advised that there is no need for me to attend but I think it is important that I do attend as these particular documents are necessary to help prove my case? Appreciate to know if anyone has any experience of attending such a hearing.

FreudianSlippers

Most likely junior counsel (in the Monday list) you don't need to be there, but there is no reason you can't. Although, you being there doesn't improve your chances of getting the discovery.

Flincher

parent wrote: »

I am in the process of taking a Personal Injuries Case against my employer. My solicitor has requested discovery of certain documents and this request has been ignored by my employers solicitors. In order to obtain these documents my solicitor has applied to the courts for this information and the hearing is shortly. Who will represent me at this hearing i.e. solicitor? junior counsel? or senior counsel? My solicitor has advised that there is no need for me to attend but I think it is important that I do attend as these particular documents are necessary to help prove my case? Appreciate to know if anyone has any experience of attending such a hearing.

Ask your solicitor who will be there. Its generally your Junior Counsel, but your Solicitor can look after it himself if he wishes, or ask a Senior to do it.

I reckon you solicitor is right, and there is no need for you to attend. You won't be asked to give evidence or anything like that, so you won't be doing anything other than looking on from the gallery.

Milk & Honey

It is all done on affidavit. Most commonly there will be a junior counsel attended by a town agent in place of the instructing solicitor for each side. No oral evidence will be heard. The only reason that discovery will not be ordered is if the documents are not necessary or relevant to the case. there will be a short legal argument as to the necessity or relevance of the documents. After that an order will be made for some, none or all of the documents to be discovered.
The application will be dealt with among numerous other short applications and it cannot be predicted within 2 or 3 hours when it will be heard in the course of the day.

Procrastastudy

Unless you have an interest in how a court works you'll be there having to be very quiet for a long time while various bits and bobs go on. On the plus side female devils and junior council are usually pretty hot but beyond this it's pretty dull. That is of course unless you have an interest in which case go along and sit in.

amdublin

GCDLawstudent wrote: »

Unless you have an interest in how a court works you'll be there having to be very quiet for a long time while various bits and bobs go on. On the plus side female devils and junior council are usually pretty hot but beyond this it's pretty dull. That is of course unless you have an interest in which case go along and sit in.

:rolleyes:

Wow oh my gosh op, you should really make your mind up on this case that you're going to court on, that is really important to you based on what this poster posted above

McCrack

amdublin wrote: »

:rolleyes:

Wow oh my gosh op, you should really make your mind up on this case that you're going to court on, that is really important to you based on what this poster posted above

At the end of the day he's right. Motion lists for non-lawyers are incredibly boring and mostly nonsensical to lay observers.

Admiring the many attractive lady barristers that will be there might be the only escape the OP has.

amdublin

^^^^
Excuse me! We are women! We are people! Not objects for you to look at to pass time.

These posts offend me greatly.

Procrastastudy

I've never understood why being an intelligent and vibrant person is mutually exclusive with admiring the aesthetic form.

If it helps most male barristers are pretty well turned out also.

To not derail this thread entirely OP seriously it will be very dull a very long wait and then very short but it is your right to go and sit in if you like. While you're at it you could maybe go and sit in on a case or two further along so you get an idea of what comes next.

McCrack

amdublin wrote: »

^^^^
Excuse me! We are women! We are people! Not objects for you to look at to pass time.

These posts offend me greatly.

Don't be offended, it's not my intention to do that. Comments were Tongue-in-cheek.

It's also human nature. Men will look at women and vice versa.

johnnyskeleton

amdublin wrote: »

^^^^
Excuse me! We are women! We are people! Not objects for you to look at to pass time.

These posts offend me greatly.

So were agreed. There is nothing attractive about young female lawyers.

Happy?

Tom Young

There is nothing stoping you attending any court in the country, at any stage provided that with the exception of some very rare and limited reasons it might be in private/camera.

If you've a legal team, let them do this work for you. You have no right of audience once your legal team are instructed and you're not a litigant in person. You can't interrupt and say: "well no, that didn't happen, etc."

The best help you can be to your case OP is to trust your legal counsel and solicitor. Discovery and Motion lists are boring and tedious.

Tom

PS: I note the comments above, which in one instance might be viewed as being out of line, and in the other instance, as hypersensitive.

Victor

It may actually be useful for you not to be there. Going may be seen as being sensitive and therefore manipulatable.

nuac

You can certainly attend.

Don't be surprised if your own solicitor is not there. Solicitors down the country employ a Dublin based solicitor, called a Town Agent, to represent them at such applications. The man or woman with a large number of files on the desk in front of him/her is likely to be the Town Agent.

There are of course usually attractive ladies of all ages about the Four Courts. Enjoy, but running a High Court action just so you can admire them would be pushing matters somewhat.

shaneybaby

nuac wrote: »

You can certainly attend.

Don't be surprised if your own solicitor is not there. Solicitors down the country employ a Dublin based solicitor, called a Town Agent, to represent them at such applications. The man or woman with a large number of files on the desk in front of him/her is likely to be the Town Agent.

There are of course usually attractive ladies of all ages about the Four Courts. Enjoy, but running a High Court action just so you can admire them would be pushing matters somewhat.

To be fair i'd like to think there are attractive men too, i dress to impress i'll have you know. i even wore different coloured socks the other day (to show i'm complex) plus a band aid on my wrist to show i was injured in a battle of some sort (chicks dig scars). mUst have been my file carrying technique that turned them off....

ResearchWill

shaneybaby wrote: »

To be fair i'd like to think there are attractive men too, i dress to impress i'll have you know. i even wore different coloured socks the other day (to show i'm complex) plus a band aid on my wrist to show i was injured in a battle of some sort (chicks dig scars). mUst have been my file carrying technique that turned them off....

I would say it was the Disney band aid never a good idea, to have a Micky mouse band aid if your over 4.

jblack

Perhaps some sort of Ryanair style calendar?

Might kick start legal services again....


*teleports back to the 50's

Procrastastudy

Hotties of the High Court?

Discodog

I would always attend as I would want to see how I was being represented & to reaffirm my personal interest in all matters relating to it.

jblack

As is your right, however I submit that an extensive and thorough set of instructions to the solicitor will ensure that all discoverable documentation is sought.

The time for paying careful attention to what you are seeking is in briefing rather than turning up, unnecessarily, to Court.

Discodog

jblack wrote: »

As is your right, however I submit that an extensive and thorough set of instructions to the solicitor will ensure that all discoverable documentation is sought.

The time for paying careful attention to what you are seeking is in briefing rather than turning up, unnecessarily, to Court.

If any lawyer told me when I should or shouldn't be paying attention he would no longer be my lawyer. Just because a lawyer is a professional & being paid to represent you does not make them infallible. Fine if he wants to save my time by suggesting that I need not attend but I will be paying attention during every second of the case because it matters to me far more than to my lawyer. I will be bearing the consequences - he won't.

jblack

Discodog wrote: »

If any lawyer told me when I should or shouldn't be paying attention he would no longer be my lawyer. Just because a lawyer is a professional & being paid to represent you does not make them infallible. Fine if he wants to save my time by suggesting that I need not attend but I will be paying attention during every second of the case because it matters to me far more than to my lawyer. I will be bearing the consequences - he won't.

Actually, there is every chance that a negligent lawyer will open themselves up to suit and therefore bear consequences.

An interfering and over zealous client can be their own worst enemy. Careful selection of a competent and diligent solicitor along with counsel at the outset is therefore extremely important .

As mentioned you are free to attend any motions and indeed gaining a familiarisation of process may prove helpful, but it is the quality of the preparation that will have the greatest affect.

Discodog

jblack wrote: »

Careful selection of a competent and diligent solicitor along with counsel at the outset is therefore extremely important .

And also almost impossible. A typical client will have no knowledge of lawyers & no way of rating them or assessing their ability.

NoQuarter

Discodog wrote: »

And also almost impossible. A typical client will have no knowledge of lawyers & no way of rating them or assessing their ability.

Nor any way of helping at this motion as its a legal argument taking place. Unless the OP knows the orders and relevant case law and principles?

Discodog

NoQuarter wrote: »

Nor any way of helping at this motion as its a legal argument taking place. Unless the OP knows the orders and relevant case law and principles?

But he may well get an indication if, for instance, the opposing lawyer appears to be better informed than his lawyer. You don't have to be an expert to see how a discussion is going.

The over zealous client may be an irritation but no more so than a patronising lawyer who assumes that you are too stupid to understand.

jblack

Discodog wrote: »

You don't have to be an expert to see how a discussion is going.

The over zealous client may be an irritation but no more so than a patronising lawyer who assumes that you are too stupid to understand.

You are quite right that an over zealous client can be an irritation but a lawyer is paid to deal with that, but what they do not realise is that they are potentially damaging their own case by insisting on certain directions and focusing resources in areas that do not warrant or require them.

As for being an expert to see how a discussion is going, I disagree with your sentence, some counsel can come across as bumbling fools to the ignorant but are quite the opposite.

jblack

I should have said- no client deserves to be patronised and indeed no client should put up with being patronised.

johnnyskeleton

GCDLawstudent wrote: »

Hotties of the High Court?

Curves ofthe circuit court?

Discodog

I think we need a proper way to rate lawyers. Maybe a won, lost & drawn table

johnnyskeleton

Discodog wrote: »

I think we need a proper way to rate lawyers. Maybe a won, lost & drawn table

No, looks, personality and body.

Kosseegan

Discodog wrote: »

But he may well get an indication if, for instance, the opposing lawyer appears to be better informed than his lawyer. You don't have to be an expert to see how a discussion is going.

The over zealous client may be an irritation but no more so than a patronising lawyer who assumes that you are too stupid to understand.

Many discovery motions are handled by devils. The devil will most likely not have any further involvement in the case. Whether he is good or bad makes little or no difference. The argument is set out on affidavit, which will have been overseen by the Junior Counsel.

blueythebear

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

No, looks, personality and body.

Personality before body? Ridiculous.

If we're going to be treating men/women as objects, why not forget about personality altogether. If we're going to objectify people, why not go the whole hog?

Procrastastudy

On a serious note I'd actually argue the wigs and gowns have there etymology in objectifying and detaching Barristers from the general public - to remove personality / looks from the equation.

pirelli

GCDLawstudent wrote: »

On a serious note I'd actually argue the wigs and gowns have there etymology in objectifying and detaching Barristers from the general public - to remove personality / looks from the equation.

I think you are confusing the word etymology with the word etiology my learned friend. The former being the origin and meaning of language and the latter being a perfect fit for what your giving a reason for.

Did you know that sexual objectification in countries such as Denmark and Norway is regulated by law and it is illegal to use a woman as a sexual object in advertising.

pirelli

pirelli wrote: »

I think you are confusing the word etymology with the word etiology my learned friend. The former being the origin and meaning of language and the latter being a perfect fit for what your giving a reason for.

Did you know that sexual objectification in countries such as Denmark and Norway is regulated by law and it is illegal to use a woman as a sexual object in advertising.

Barristers aren't allowed to advertise anyway so there's another bullet dodged.

nuac

So no Ryan Air or Hunky Dory advertising in those countries.?

pirelli

nuac wrote: »

So no Ryan Air or Hunky Dory advertising in those countries.?

Definitely not!

They allow full nudity, so you could in theory have a ryanair plane flying over a nudist beach but you cannot have a scantly clad female bent over the cockpit control panel of a Ryanair plane.

nuac

Good heavens Pirelli I dont like Ryanair but on your description of what goes on in the cock pit I might try them.

Procrastastudy

LOL rather embarrassing spelling mistake vocabulary failure on my behalf...

On another note does anyone else have a problem hearing what's being said in the Supreme Court - especially when people come crashing in and out.

To be fair you guys are obviously a lot closer than I am!