What is a high court hearing?

Reggie.

As above.
Just received a letter stating my high court case is going for hearing in a months time. Solicitor states he'll be in contact at a later time to discuss further and a confirmed date.

Tried to Google the meaning but can't find a straight answer anywhere.

I'll take it that I'll have to attend?
What's involved in a hearing?
Thankfully not familiar with court procedures
Thanking in advance....

Mr. Incognito

Its a hearing in the High Courts

Usually at the Four Courts.

They are accessable to the public- feel free to wander in and have a look

thebiglad

This may help but your Solicitor is best positioned to advice you.

http://courts.ie/Courts.ie/library3.nsf/(WebFiles)/A15BCA388D64C09C80257DFC003EA21C/$FILE/Explaining%20the%20Courts%20Complete%20booklet%20for%20web.pdf

There are High Courts in all Provinces so does not necessarily have to be Dublin to which the OP is referring.

I would expect there will be a meeting with your Solicitor and Senior Counsel in advance of the court date at the Courts where it should be explained to you what will happen.

A lot depends on the reason for the High Court attendance and whether the case is in your name or you are a witness for another party.

If you get a date to attend at the High Court which is the same as expected date of the hearing then ask your Solicitor in advance to meet you or explain the process.

Reggie.

thebiglad wrote: »

There are High Courts in all Provinces so does not necessarily have to be Dublin to which the OP is referring.

I would expect there will be a meeting with your Solicitor and Senior Counsel in advance of the court date at the Courts where it should be explained to you what will happen.

A lot depends on the reason for the High Court attendance and whether the case is in your name or you are a witness for another party.

If you get a date to attend at the High Court which is the date of the hearing then ask your Solicitor in advance to meet you or explain the process.

Yes it's a personnel injury case from a car accident and it's in my name.

What is the purpose of the hearing?
I'm guessing it's to lay out the facts of the incident and to get a date set for the high court?

nuac

Mod
Poster,
It usually takes some years to get a personal injury action ready for a High Court hearing.
You really need to talk to your solicitor about all that is involved

Reggie.

nuac wrote: »

Mod
Poster,
It usually takes some years to get a personal injury action ready for a High Court hearing.
You really need to talk to your solicitor about all that is involved

Case is years old already and been through everything to get to this point. Just wondering what is involved in a hearing is what I'm asking.

Solicitor not available till a later date as I stated above. Was just looking for a layman's idea of what happens or what to expect. Maybe I came to the wrong place.

hullaballoo

It sounds like it's in for hearing. In layman's terms, that means you have a date for trial.

In real terms, that date is tentative but there is a chance your case could be heard in full at some stage in the week it's listed for hearing.

Reggie.

hullaballoo wrote: »

It sounds like it's in for hearing. In layman's terms, that means you have a date for trial.

In real terms, that date is tentative but there is a chance your case could be heard in full at some stage in the week it's listed for hearing.

Really that quick? I'm sure that instance is rare enough tho. I thought myself that the trial date would be well after the hearing as in weeks afterwards. That never occured to me that it could possibly be the same week. Thanks for the info hullaballoo.

hullaballoo

Just to clarify (with a caveat, of course! )

Hearing = trial. So there isn't a hearing first and then a trial. The terms are sometimes used interchangeably and I think that is the case here.

At least that's what I'm getting from what you've posted.

The caveat is that it could be a hearing of another sort but tbh I would be very surprised in the context of what you have posted for there to be any other kind of hearing that your solicitor would notify you of using these words. I'd say the chances that it's anything other than the trial are so remote as to be non-existent imo.

Reggie.

Reggie. wrote: »

As above.
Just received a letter stating my high court case is going for hearing in a months time. Solicitor states he'll be in contact at a later time to discuss further and a confirmed date.

Tried to Google the meaning but can't find a straight answer anywhere.

I'll take it that I'll have to attend?
What's involved in a hearing?
Thankfully not familiar with court procedures
Thanking in advance....

Just to add to the above advice you've been given you may have to give evidence as to what happened to cause the accident.

When you get to the court, you will be told that we operate a list system in Ireland, which means your case will be listed with several other cases for the same day. Depending on where you are on the list you may or may not be heard. You chances of being heard are higher if you are nearer the top of the list. The list rolls over from day to day so you should get progressively higher as the days go by. If it's not heard during the week allotted to it, it will be pushed back the next time the court is sitting.

This system allows for negotiation between the parties as they wait for the case to be called. Unfortunately this also entails long periods of waiting around, especially costly if experts are also waiting to give evidence.

Having everyone in the court building (as opposed to being in the court room) tends to focus people's mind as to whether this case can be settled by negotiations or if you need the court to determine it.

Reggie.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Just to add to the above advice you've been given you may have to give evidence as to what happened to cause the accident.

When you get to the court, you will be told that we operate a list system in Ireland, which means your case will be listed with several other cases for the same day. Depending on where you are on the list you may or may not be heard. You chances of being heard are higher if you are nearer the top of the list. The list rolls over from day to day so you should get progressively higher as the days go by. If it's not heard during the week allotted to it, it will be pushed back the next time the court is sitting.

This system allows for negotiation between the parties as they wait for the case to be called. Unfortunately this also entails long periods of waiting around, especially costly if experts are also waiting to give evidence.

Having everyone in the court building (as opposed to being in the court room) tends to focus people's mind as to whether this case can be settled by negotiations or if you need the court to determine it.

Yes I've been preparing myself for the hurry up and wait scenario. Thanks for that.

Reggie.

hullaballoo wrote: »

Just to clarify (with a caveat, of course! )

Hearing = trial. So there isn't a hearing first and then a trial. The terms are sometimes used interchangeably and I think that is the case here.

At least that's what I'm getting from what you've posted.

The caveat is that it could be a hearing of another sort but tbh I would be very surprised in the context of what you have posted for there to be any other kind of hearing that your solicitor would notify you of using these words. I'd say the chances that it's anything other than the trial are so remote as to be non-existent imo.

Ah yeah to be honest I always thought a hearing was separate to the actual trial. I'm blaming the American shows . Like I said no experience of court at all so it's a steep learning curve.

4ensic15

Another thing to note is there may be no hearing at all. More often than not, personal injury cases settle without being heard. You may just find yourself standing around a courthouse for hours while talks go on.

CIARAN_BOYLE

Reggie. wrote: »

Ah yeah to be honest I always thought a hearing was separate to the actual trial. I'm blaming the American shows . Like I said no experience of court at all so it's a steep learning curve.

In criminal cases the media separates hearing and trial.

In these cases a hearing is usually a procedural matter where the jury is not present while the main body of the thing is the trial.

Usually in a civil case there is no real distinction.

breda1970

So if your personal injury case is listed for a certain date,does that mean all the specialists/doctors involved have to be informed ,so they can attend ?
When people say it settles on the steps of the court,what happens all the specialist doctors?do they still get there days pay...?

Peregrinus

breda1970 wrote: »

So if your personal injury case is listed for a certain date,does that mean all the specialists/doctors involved have to be informed ,so they can attend ?

If it's listed for the hearing of the action on that day, yes, obviously you need the necessary witnesses to be present. But if it's just listed for some preliminary or intermediate step, then no.

breda1970 wrote: »

When people say it settles on the steps of the court,what happens all the specialist doctors?do they still get there days pay...?

Yes, of course they do. They still had to turn up, and were prevented from doing whatever they would have been doing if the trial hadn't been listed for that day. The earlier in the proceedings you settle your case the less the proceedings themselves will cost you, and this is one of the tactical factors that feeds into decisions about settlements.

4ensic15

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

In criminal cases the media separates hearing and trial.

In these cases a hearing is usually a procedural matter where the jury is not present while the main body of the thing is the trial.

Usually in a civil case there is no real distinction.

The media has no input into a trial, only to observe. When the jury is sent out the proceedings are described as a "voir dire". The entire comprises a hearing.

breda1970

Peregrinus wrote: »

If it's listed for the hearing of the action on that day, yes, obviously you need the necessary witnesses to be present. But if it's just listed for some preliminary or intermediate step, then no.


Yes, of course they do. They still had to turn up, and were prevented from doing whatever they would have been doing if the trial hadn't been listed for that day. The earlier in the proceedings you settle your case the less the proceedings themselves will cost you, and this is one of the tactical factors that feeds into decisions about settlements.

So does that mean there has to be an some sort of settlement discussions between both party’s before for the actual court date?
If there is no settlement offers from either side,what way does the judge look at this?

Claw Hammer

breda1970 wrote: »

So does that mean there has to be an some sort of settlement discussions between both party’s before for the actual court date?
If there is no settlement offers from either side,what way does the judge look at this?

The judge is not told of settlement offers. He might be told of talks but not the detail of talks. There is no obligation to hold settlement talks but when an insurance company is defending and the case looks reasonable they will make an offer. A settled case does not give rise to an appeal and usually there is no publicity.

Peregrinus

breda1970 wrote: »

So does that mean there has to be an some sort of settlement discussions between both party’s before for the actual court date?
If there is no settlement offers from either side,what way does the judge look at this?

What Claw Hammer said. There doesn't have to be settlement offers at any point in the process, though there are usually at least approached by one side or the other. The judge is not normally involved (unless one of the parties is a minor or a ward of court, in which case any settlement will need court approval).

realitykeeper

You probably won`t be asked to say anything. The Judge will hear an outline of the case and decide whether or not to accept jurisdiction. I am rather unimpressed with the Irish legal system. I discovered its ins and outs in civil case back in the naughties. It works best if you don`t have to use it, i.e. just use it as a deterrent. When the great recession happened, you had all these people claiming to be sovereign individuals who did not recognize the law (usually because they couldn`t pay their mortgage) and groups like Integrity Ireland and yer man the bald fellow who tries to help people in mortgage difficulty doing the rounds. Fun stuff.

hullaballoo

realitykeeper wrote: »

You probably won`t be asked to say anything. The Judge will hear an outline of the case and decide whether or not to accept jurisdiction. I am rather unimpressed with the Irish legal system. I discovered its ins and outs in civil case back in the naughties. It works best if you don`t have to use it, i.e. just use it as a deterrent. When the great recession happened, you had all these people claiming to be sovereign individuals who did not recognize the law (usually because they couldn`t pay their mortgage) and groups like Integrity Ireland and yer man the bald fellow who tries to help people in mortgage difficulty doing the rounds. Fun stuff.

Neither of the emboldened points are true.

If you are the plaintiff in a High Court personal injury case that goes to trial, expect a minimum of a full day in the witness box. It could be less than a day if straightforward but in the majority of cases that go to trial these days, the examination of the plaintiff goes on for quite some time.

On the second point, a judge hears an outline and accepts/refuses jurisdiction only in the District Court for criminal offences that are triable summarily or on indictment. That's the only place and time that I can think of that the procedure operates in this way.

As a plaintiff in a personal injuries case, once you see the judge assigned to your case, you are either running your case before that judge or walking away.

realitykeeper

hullaballoo wrote: »

Neither of the emboldened points are true.

If you are the plaintiff in a High Court personal injury case that goes to trial, expect a minimum of a full day in the witness box. It could be less than a day if straightforward but in the majority of cases that go to trial these days, the examination of the plaintiff goes on for quite some time.

On the second point, a judge hears an outline and accepts/refuses jurisdiction only in the District Court for criminal offences that are triable summarily or on indictment. That's the only place and time that I can think of that the procedure operates in this way.

As a plaintiff in a personal injuries case, once you see the judge assigned to your case, you are either running your case before that judge or walking away.

I thought your solicitor would just say a few words on your behalf, then after a few moments of the usual befuddling by the judge a trial date would be set. Sounds like much ado about nothing.

breda1970

hullaballoo wrote: »

Neither of the emboldened points are true.

If you are the plaintiff in a High Court personal injury case that goes to trial, expect a minimum of a full day in the witness box. It could be less than a day if straightforward but in the majority of cases that go to trial these days, the examination of the plaintiff goes on for quite some time.

On the second point, a judge hears an outline and accepts/refuses jurisdiction only in the District Court for criminal offences that are triable summarily or on indictment. That's the only place and time that I can think of that the procedure operates in this way.

As a plaintiff in a personal injuries case, once you see the judge assigned to your case, you are either running your case before that judge or walking away.

Do you mean on the morning of the court whenever the case is as signed to a judge,either settle at that point or let the case run??
I seen in cases before the judge annoyed because the parties could not come to an arrangement instead of wasting court time..

4ensic15

breda1970 wrote: »

Do you mean on the morning of the court whenever the case is as signed to a judge,either settle at that point or let the case run??
I seen in cases before the judge annoyed because the parties could not come to an arrangement instead of wasting court time..

Quite often a case can only be accurately valued when it is known who the judge is. Quite often cases are halted to allow for talks. Settlement negotiations can start long before a trial and can take place up till judgement is delivered.

nuac

There may be various efforts to settle a case
Some insurers used to call, by appointment, to the Plaintiff's solicitor's office to negotiate. That was more usual towards the end of their financial year when they were hoping to reduce the number of their open cases.
Not as common nowadays.
Other meetings might take place at the courthouse months before the case is to be heard. Sometimes it is a genuine effort to explore settlement; other times it is to suss out the amount of the lodgment.
While a case might still be settled on "on the steps", many insurers wait to see if the plaintiff is actually ready to go into the box and swear up before making their best offer.
Some defence teams mention just before trials that they have videos of plaintiff which will damage the plaintiffs, or that the insurer has some issue about validity of cover.
Few plaintiffs want to give evidence in such cases - I would be worried about anyone rushing into the box. An experienced plaintiff's solicitor has to prepare and psych the plaintiff to walk confidently into the witness box and to look directly at the trial judge.
I don't know why defences go on with these games. It only adds to the expenses and costs

,

ezra_

breda1970 wrote: »

I seen in cases before the judge annoyed because the parties could not come to an arrangement instead of wasting court time..

I have seen this once in a HC case. The Judge suggested that the parties engage in talks, and a settlement was reached that morning.

From talking to the people involved, the judge was pretty scathing that this had gotten as far as the HC (was a civil matter).

Peregrinus

realitykeeper wrote: »

I thought your solicitor would just say a few words on your behalf, then after a few moments of the usual befuddling by the judge a trial date would be set. Sounds like much ado about nothing.

Usual form is that both sides are asked to confirm that they are ready to go to trial.

If they both say "yes", then a date is fixed. May be a bit of back-and-forth reconciling (a) slots available on the court list with (b) parties views about how urgenly the matter needs to be resolved, (c) issues about particular dates which might problematic, (d) etc, but this is usually dispatched in a few minutes.

If one party says "no", then a bit of a grilling about why they're not ready yet, what the problem is, how soon they can be ready, etc. followed by setting a date on which the matter will be looked at again, and issuing of dire threats about what will happen if still not ready by that date.

This may have an indirect bearing on settlement efforts. If other party isn't ready to go to trial, and you sense that issue may be that they have a problem with witnesses, evidence, etc, and that their case is starting to look dodgy. In which case a quick offer of a low settlement figure might be v. attractive to them, and might get rid of the matter quickly at what you regard as an acceptable cost. So you might make that offer. Alternatively you might decide not to make or accept any offer of settlement, because you think they are likely to lose at trial.

breda1970

But if the defendant thought the person would receive an award in court,would it not make sense to make an offer before the court sitting or lodge an amount in court to save on the expenses of high court/specialists dr etc..

nuac

nuac wrote: »

There may be various efforts to settle a case
Some insurers used to call, by appointment, to the Plaintiff's solicitor's office to negotiate. That was more usual towards the end of their financial year when they were hoping to reduce the number of their open cases.
Not as common nowadays.
Other meetings might take place at the courthouse months before the case is to be heard. Sometimes it is a genuine effort to explore settlement; other times it is to suss out the amount of the lodgment.
While a case might still be settled on "on the steps", many insurers wait to see if the plaintiff is actually ready to go into the box and swear up before making their best offer.
Some defence teams mention just before trials that they have videos of plaintiff which will damage the plaintiffs, or that the insurer has some issue about validity of cover.
Few plaintiffs want to give evidence in such cases - I would be worried about anyone rushing into the box. An experienced plaintiff's solicitor has to prepare and psych the plaintiff to walk confidently into the witness box and to look directly at the trial judge.
I don't know why defences go on with these games. It only adds to the expenses and costs

,

Cuts both ways, very often plaintiff solicitors only seriously engage in settlement talks on the day in the Court. Personally I think increased collegiality between both sides would lead to quicker and more efficient settlements which would ultimately benefit both side's clients more.

Imo, bad practices on both sides has lessened trust over the years, needlessly. (and sadly many of these bad practices are rooted in bad training)

4ensic15

breda1970 wrote: »

But if the defendant thought the person would receive an award in court,would it not make sense to make an offer before the court sitting or lodge an amount in court to save on the expenses of high court/specialists dr etc..

It is often not known which judge will hear the case until the day of the hearing. Until they know which judge will hear the matter, the defence can't value the case.

breda1970

But a good defence solicitor would not make any offer before the court and that would put the plaintiff under pressure to except a lower offer on the morning of the court.
Can a certain judge make that much of a difference in a personal injury case?

Claw Hammer

breda1970 wrote: »

But a good defence solicitor would not make any offer before the court and that would put the plaintiff under pressure to except a lower offer on the morning of the court.
Can a certain judge make that much of a difference in a personal injury case?

What happens is that the case is valued by the underwriters. They will often try a low ball offer at an early stage. If a case has got to the point of being heard there is a risk something can go wrong on either side. A new medical report showing worsening injury might appear. The judge might be in a giveaway mood.
If the defence can get the case off their hands at the lower end of expectations they will do so.
There are major differences between judges. Some are more prone to throw cases out for exaggeration than others. Some award far more in damages than others.

breda1970

So the case is valued by the underwriters and this figure is given to the defence solicitor.so the defence will do there best to get it thrown out or offer as little as possible and it excepted..?
Then the defence get a
pat in the back and more work given there way...
Is there much of a savings in costs settling the case on the court steps?

4ensic15

breda1970 wrote: »

So the case is valued by the underwriters and this figure is given to the defence solicitor.so the defence will do there best to get it thrown out or offer as little as possible and it excepted..?
Then the defence get a
pat in the back and more work given there way...
Is there much of a savings in costs settling the case on the court steps?

There is very little saving. By the time the case gets to the steps, most costs have been incurred. There may be some saving on standby costs and refreshers fees but these are a relatively small percentage of the total. The main saving is that there is no appeal. Insurance companies are happy if the majority of their cases settle within the expected range. Insurance companies work on a global basis. Write x no of policies. Get notification of y no claims. Provide z against the claims. Pay out z on claims. They are going to have the odd outlier but they know some settlements are going to be more than they might have had to pay, others are going to be less.

Sleeper12

Mr. Incognito wrote:

They are accessable to the public- feel free to wander in and have a look

It's a great day out if you aren't in the dock. It can be fascinating and entertaining and a little sad all rolled into one. I think everyone should visit court for the day.

breda1970

The defence may try and discredit you if a case goes to trial,but if the accident happened and every thing I’d in the medical notes history-does the judge not look at the medical notes /reports when coming to a decision?

4ensic15

breda1970 wrote: »

The defence may try and discredit you if a case goes to trial,but if the accident happened and every thing I’d in the medical notes history-does the judge not look at the medical notes /reports when coming to a decision?

The judge looks at the evidence put before her.

FreudianSlippers

4ensic15 wrote: »

There is very little saving. By the time the case gets to the steps, most costs have been incurred. There may be some saving on standby costs and refreshers fees but these are a relatively small percentage of the total. The main saving is that there is no appeal. Insurance companies are happy if the majority of their cases settle within the expected range. Insurance companies work on a global basis. Write x no of policies. Get notification of y no claims. Provide z against the claims. Pay out z on claims. They are going to have the odd outlier but they know some settlements are going to be more than they might have had to pay, others are going to be less.

How long is a piece of string?

breda1970

Would there be more negotiations the weeks leading up to the court date?if the defence was plans on an offer at the steps,the plantiff solicitor is hardy going to keep annoying them and looking desperate...

4ensic15

breda1970 wrote: »

Would there be more negotiations the weeks leading up to the court date?if the defence was plans on an offer at the steps,the plantiff solicitor is hardy going to keep annoying them and looking desperate...

There might be some but the single biggest unknown is the identity of the judge who will hear the case. Settlement negotiations take place between counsel. There may be some casual toing and froing leading up to the hearing but so many cases are adjourned that serious negotiation only really begins on the day of the hearing.

breda1970

Do the specialists doctors have to wait about the court all day or does that have any impact on an getting an early settlement?
Can they ask whatever they want for there days pay?

Johnny Red Cab

They are normally on call for the days the case is listed. And yes they can claim for each day on call.

Dakotabigone

What are we talking here, how many €75,000 balers?

Mod
75000 balers?

Peregrinus

There are standard fees agreed between (I think) the Law Society and (I think) the IMO for giving a medical report for litigation purposes, for being on call to attend court, for giving evidence. I've no idea what the fees currently are. The agreement has no legal force; doctors are free to ask for higher fees but lawyers are generally very reluctant to agree to higher fees.

breda1970

What would happen if an orthopaedic dr had a few operations booked in for the day.his/her fees could run into thousands for the day.

Claw Hammer

breda1970 wrote: »

What would happen if an orthopaedic dr had a few operations booked in for the day.his/her fees could run into thousands for the day.

They schedule their operations for days when they do not have appearances in court.

breda1970

I see posts where defence have lodged money into court.is this common practice and have they a time limit to do this before the trial?

4ensic15

breda1970 wrote: »

I see posts where defence have lodged money into court.is this common practice and have they a time limit to do this before the trial?

It happens from time to time. It is part of the psychological game they play. There is a limited period during which the defence can make a payment into court before the trial.

breda1970

so when a high court date is set down,will the defence sit down and focus or just forget about the case until a week before the trial date?
What is the process for the defence solicitor when a date is set down?

Claw Hammer

breda1970 wrote: »

so when a high court date is set down,will the defence sit down and focus or just forget about the case until a week before the trial date?
What is the process for the defence solicitor when a date is set down?

Defence solicitors will be handing many cases simultaneously. Their main cocernn is logistical, getting papers together, making sure witnesses are available, counsel hae papers and are available. The decision on settlement is with the case handler in the insurance company. The case handler may carry out a review and advise they can offer a certain amount before trial. They may try and ask counsel to get some feel from the other side as to expectations. In a run of the mill case, which most are, the papers will be prepared and then it is wait and see what happens.