Source: http://cfcj-fcjc.org/inventory-of-reforms/northwest-territories-case-management-part-19/
Timestamp: 2018-11-18 10:58:33
Document Index: 660071028

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 19', 'art 19', 'art 19', 'art 19', 'art 19', 'art 19', 'art 19', 'art 19']

CFCJ-FCJC | Northwest Territories Case Management (Part 19) - CFCJ-FCJC Northwest Territories Case Management (Part 19) - CFCJ-FCJC
Northwest Territories Case Management (Part 19)
1996: Case management rules come into effect
December 1999: Notice to the Profession clarifying rules
Rules of the Supreme Court of the Northwest Territories, Part 19.
Supreme Court of the Northwest Territories, Notice to the Profession: Case Management Procedures – General Guidelines (Northwest Territories Courts, 1996).
Supreme Court of the Northwest Territories, Notice to the Profession: Case Management Guidelines (No. 2) (Northwest Territories Courts, 1999).
The incorporation of Part 19 into the Rules of Court was essentially a formalization of dispute mechanism tools already informally used by the court. By putting the rules in writing, the Court is able to apply the procedures uniformly and with clear guidelines. Rules 281-292 (Part 19) were modelled on Saskatchewan’s r. 192, Ontario’s r.50, and B.C.’s r.35(5).
The Supreme Court of the Northwest Territories describes the purpose of Part 19 in a Notice to the Profession issued in June 1996:
The purpose of Part 19 is to provide flexibility in procedures so as to facilitate matters for trial or to effect a pre-trial settlement. It is premised on the “multi-door courthouse” approach: one way to get into system (by starting an action) but, once in the system, many options (beside a trial) to choose from. The rules can accommodate a wide variety of steps from the traditional pre-trial conference to a highly involved settlement-oriented colloquy. The objectives are nevertheless the same: the resolution of disputes without trial if possible and, if a trial is required, the simplification of issues so as to make the entire process more efficient in both time and money for the litigants (1996 Notice).
Settlement conference: A settlement conference is essentially a form of alternative dispute resolution designed to avoid trials. The judge’s role is that of an objective mediator who keeps the discussion on track. Topic areas include: assessing success on various issues and damages that may be awarded; financial resources available to parties to meet a judgement; insurance coverage; offers and counter offers made; legal costs of litigation to date, to trial, and to possibly appeal. As a general rule, the settlement conference judge cannot be the trial judge. A settlement conference may be requested by the agreement of all the parties.
Mini-trial: Mini trials are in-camera hearings whereby the presiding judge gives a non binding advisory opinion on the probable outcome at trial [Rule 292]. The mini trial judge cannot be the trial judge. This procedure is best suited to cases which involve areas of legal dispute where neither credibility nor facts are significantly at issue. Although the judge’s opinion would only be advisory, it normally would have a substantial enough effect on counsel to move the parties toward settlement.