Suchergebnisse

A departure from traditional procedural concepts was launched by the adoption of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. One of the major innovations instituted which diminishes the time required for litigation is the pre-trial con ference. This conference between the adversary lawyers and the judge delimits the issues in an action, disposing of un contested issues, fixing the essential points, and thus often pre paring a case for settlement. Though a practical and effective procedure, the full rewards have yet to be reaped. The rela tive newness of the pre-trial conference and the unequal impact of the expanded litigation have limited its country-wide adop tion. Pre-trial procedure recognizes the current conception of a lawsuit: one free from surprise, with all triable issues exposed prior to the courtroom.—Ed.

A response to Kevin Kirwin and Chris Hignett (Probation Journal, June 1987), alleging that their arguments against preparing pre- trial SERS are unsound, negative and promote passive practice.

Abstract: An attempt is made to assess the effects of the introduction of pre‐trial settlement procedures on the disposition of criminal cases in the lower courts. The negotiating strategies adopted by solicitors at pre‐trial reviews in the Nottingham Magistrates' Court are examined and the effect of the informal exchanges that take place on levels of case settlement is explored. There is no doubt that pre‐trial reviews induce high settlement rates although it is by no means clear how these are achieved. Some explanations are discussed in this paper together with the implications for the victim and the accused.