circuit court procedures

jonnreeks

Hi,

I am just wondering what are the actual procedures when attending the circuit court. Take for example a case between two people over some dispute, maybe anti-social behaviour, property dispute, parking and so on.

Am I right in saying that both parties will have their barristers outline the position for their client to the judge first in regards to the case which may include evidence and arguments.

The judge will then speak and maybe question both the plaintiff and defendant alternatively to get their opinion of the issue.

I then presume the judge makes a qualified determination based on this.

Again, this is me having little knowledge or experience of court procedures and would appreciate anyone who has experienced court to advise and explain the correct way things operate.

Regards

N

Victor

While the legal representatives* might present the case and make arguments, evidence is usually down to witnesses, which might or might not include the parties to the case.

* If I'm correct, most circuit court cases would involve solicitors only, with limited barrister involvement. However, if there are legal nuances, a barrister with relevant knowledge might be the most suitable person to make a particular argument.

Claw Hammer

The Circuit Court is adversial. The judge doesn't get involved in questioning unless it is for clarification.
It is up to the Plaintiff to present their case, call witnesses, prove documentary and real evidence, and cross-examine defence witnesses. and for the defendant to cross-examine plaintiff witnesses and call their own witnesses and documentary evidence.
both sides then make submissions on the evidence and what facts should be inferred from the evidence and the law which applies to the situation.
The judge then decides.

Claw Hammer

Most circuit court cases involve barristers usually one but sometimes a Senior Counsel might be instructed as well.

jonnreeks

Hi Claw Hammer,

So, from what I can make out the Circuit Court involves barristers on both sides who make submissions for their client based on their evidence and facts about the case and the law which applies to the situation.

The judge then decides.

Appreciate your post and by the by, would this advice be based on your experience of attending court or just knowledge.

Thanks

N

Claw Hammer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122857136#Comment_122857136

I have been in the Circuit Court many times.

DFB-D

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122857969#Comment_122857969

But in what context?

Setting foot in there to observe does not really signify any particular experience, as a plaintiff you might have some knowledge of why a barrister was retained,etc.

Claw Hammer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122861214#Comment_122861214

Go into any circuit court on any day civil cases are listed. In the vast majority of cases barristers appear for each side
Why this is the case is not relevant to this discussion.

DFB-D

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122861700#Comment_122861700

But there are a lot of cases where barristers are not used - for example cases brought under the companies act. So as a spectator, you are not party to the decision of whether to engage a barrister or not, I suspect the decisions are broadly similar to what another poster suggested, for specialist arguments they engage the barrister otherwise the solicitor pleads the case.

The Op presumably is asking about tort cases which are over the district court limits, but I suspect the district would be the more appropriate court for the mentioned factors. For tort, the decision on whether to engage a barrister is presumably the same in either court.

jonnreeks

Hi,

I suppose when you engage a solicitor to take on a case you will be told if a barrister will be necessary depending on how serious the case is.

🙂

Claw Hammer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122862123#Comment_122862123

The was a suggestion that most circuit court cases involve solicitors only. Most companies act applications are brought in the District Court. It is a simple matter of observation. If you go into the Dublin Civil Courts tomorrow, there are 3 of them sitting and most cases will have barristers. In personal injuries cases there will almost invariably be barristers on both sides. In family cases there will be many lay litigants and some with solicitor only advocates but practically all criminal cases and the majority of civil cases have barristers.
there are reasons as to why this is so, but it is not relevant to the issue as to whether it is common or not.

jonnreeks

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122862226#Comment_122862226

Great insight and very interesting. Thanks for your fine detail and level of understanding with your replies.

DFB-D

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122862193#Comment_122862193

Swop serious for complex & that sounds about right!

DFB-D

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122862226#Comment_122862226

Most companies acts cases are brought in the district court, that's not right, it surely depends on the case/category of offence?

There's no need to physically go to the courts - the diary is online now for many years and includes solicitors names. Thank god, I wouldn't have time to be hanging around there all day! All ten seem to have cases tomorrow.

https://legaldiary.courts.ie/legaldiary.nsf/circuit-court?OpenView&Jurisdiction=circuit-court&area=Dublin%20Region&type=&dateType=Date&dateFrom=21-11-2024&dateTo=&text=

Claw Hammer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122862733#Comment_122862733

This is a discussion about civil cases. What offences are you saying are prosecuted in the Circuit Court without the involvement of barristers?

What use is the Legal Diary. The solicitors names being listed does not disclose whether or not barristers are involved. You need to be physically present to see barristers.

DFB-D

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122865594#Comment_122865594

I would tend to agree you need to be physically present or utilising video equipment to actually "see" the barristers in an particular location. "Physics" is a burden on us all 🤔

No one posted or suggested "offenses are prosecuted in the Circuit Court without the involvement of barristers".

But as you stated that the majority of cases under the company acts were taken in the district court, where very few civil cases under the acts are taken, given the low threshold, I did wonder if you were quoting for offenses.

I mention the Legal Diary to aid someone who would like to verify for themselves if both sides in those cases have barristers appearing. I just find it incredible that someone can state, contradictory to another poster, that the majority of cases are heard with Barristers appearing for both sides based on a statement - "been in the Circuit courts many times". When you are not there in an official capacity, the "many times" you refer to must be relatively few compared to those professionally involved, in which case, it is not a experience you can claim the "majority" of cases have barristers for both sides.

Claw Hammer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122866309#Comment_122866309

It does not matter in what capacity anypne is present. they can see for themselves whether or not barristers are appearing.
Stay there for 10 minutes at the start of the day for the call over and notice that barristers appear in the vast majority of cases. Do it a few times and see the same thing.
What more do you want? An affidavit from a court service official?

The Legal diary does not verify if barristers are appearing. The most it does is show that solicitors are on record.

Video recording is not allowed to see who is appearing in the precincts of the courts.

You claim that there are no barristers involved in cases brought under the companies acts. What cases are these?
There are far more case brought under the companies acts to the District Court than to the circuit court. I never said they were offences. Most are in fact civil.

DFB-D

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122866650#Comment_122866650

Yes, well that was sarcasm 😂

Yes please - provide some statistics! I just couldn't trust someone who claims most companies acts cases are brought through the district court given the threshold is 15k, what exactly do you think civil cases under the act are regarding?

Claw Hammer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122867331#Comment_122867331

Permission to file late returns are brought in the District Court. These are quite common. Most other companies acts applications are brought in the High Court The only companies acts applications in the Circuit Court are examinership applications which are extremely rare and some applications involving the MUDS act.

The 15k limit is irrelevant as that applies to damages claims and not companies act applications.

jonnreeks

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122867331#Comment_122867331

Hi,

Just following up on your very interesting comments.

Will the legal teams see each sides evidence to be used in their arguments?Are the clients entitled to see medical or engineers reports in advance?Do clients get briefed on how the court case procedure may happen?Do you meet your barrister beforehand?Would you be advised what questions may be asked by a judge?

Regards

N

DFB-D

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122869458#Comment_122869458

If such an action existed, it would be administrative not a civil case.

Late returns are normal and do not need permission to file from the district court.

You may need to extend the return to avoid an order for strike off/ prosecution being carried out if applicable.

Civil cases relate to damages arising from breach of the companies act.

You will now argue that your definition of civil cases includes administrative actions - etc etc. Flat no, they are not, they are applications, not cases.

DFB-D

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122869731#Comment_122869731

I am not a legal professional so most of my knowledge is related to company matters, so I might discover something during an audit, etc.

But from general knoweldge:

1. Evidence documents - yes and you must also provide yours, you cannot omit documents which would damage your case.
2. Yes you will be briefed.
3. Barrister - if using one - yes you should.
4. Judges questions - broadly yes, Judges can ask questions of witnesses or legal professionals, but depending on the level of representation - they might only ask procedural questions. But I have seen Judges directly question a witness and go back to the barrister about a false statement he had made in the affidavit. If you are giving evidence, the other side can ask you questions as well.

Claw Hammer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122869821#Comment_122869821

https://www.courts.ie/rules/applications-extend-time-delivery-annual-return-under-section-343-companies-act-2014-si-no-256

Those are applications brought in the DistrictCourt. They are far mor common that any applications under the Companies Acts in the Circuit Court.
What cases are brought for damages for breach of the Companies Acts? What breaches?

All applications involve the administration of cases. They may not be inter parte cases.
You stated that companies act cases are heard without barristers in the Circuit Court.
What cases and under what provisions of the Companies Acts?

Claw Hammer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122870182#Comment_122870182

Not every evidence document has to be disclosed in advance. Only those which are formally discovered. Other documents may be led in evidence or used in cross-examination without being disclosed in advance.
There will be a pre trial consultation but it will not be a course in practice and procedure.
Some judges go far beyond their role in asking questions but this will most likely be known to the barristers who are appearing frequently in their court.

DFB-D

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122870266#Comment_122870266

I can't read that mess, but I'm guessing, more predictable shite…

DFB-D

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122870356#Comment_122870356

So documents the party had yet to discover themselves do not have to be handed over? Well Duh 😂

2nd point is contradictory - I have rarely seen someone contradict themselves in a single sentence.

I think I'll limit my replies to you, on most occasions, you degrade to nonsense.

jonnreeks

So, just to confirm. In civilian court cases like a property dispute you should be allowed to view or get a copy of any engineers reports carried out and deemed necessary for either side from your solicitor. And also the same for any medical reports required for either side involved in a personal injuries court case?

Your advice and information is really appreciated.

N

Victor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122878200#Comment_122878200

I think there will be rules for what is discoverable generally (decided by court rules) and what is discoverable in a particular case (decided by the judge, usually well before the case is heard). So, if you are in a car crash and break you arm, demands for the details of your toe fungus wouldn't likely be granted.

Claw Hammer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122870720#Comment_122870720

I said formally doscovered. It is quite clear you don't know what discovery meants in the context of court proceedings.
maybe read ther rules of court before you make your ignorant and sneering jibes.
https://www.courts.ie/rules/discovery-and-inspection-documents-and-interrogatories

Of course you are not engaging in further debate. Your previous points about cases in the circuit court seeking compensation for breaches of the companies acts are nonsense. You can't stand over them.
You are obviously suffering some variant of AKE syndrome.

People like you are a menace!

Victor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122881295#Comment_122881295

New-onset acrokeratoelastoidosis: Acrokeratoelastoidosis (AKE), is a rare keratoderma characterized by small, round, skin-colored papules on the palms and soles.

Claw Hammer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122881369#Comment_122881369

I was taking about the syndrome, not the disease!