Holding a hearing and interrogating declarants
- Regarding the interrogation of the declarants, instructions were made In Regulation 11 to the Torts Regulations, but
The parties disagreed among themselves as to their meaning, and this is the wording of the regulation:
(a) On the date set for the hearing, the declarants will appear for an interrogation of their affidavits, unless the court orders otherwise.
(b) The hearing of the application will be completed within one day; If the court deems it necessary, it may schedule additional days of hearings, as consecutively as possible, until the conclusion of the examination of the witnesses.
(c) The parties may submit to the court, up to seven days before the date set for the hearing, a list of legal references and written arguments; A summary of the parties' arguments will be oral on the day of the hearing of the application after the conclusion of the presentation of the evidence.
(d) The court will issue a decision on the application within 14 days at the latest, at the latest, from the end of the hearing of the application, and before any other decision is made on the claim.
According to Flexer, this regulation should be interpreted as stipulating a duty to hold a hearing on the application and to allow the interrogation of the declarants on behalf of both parties, while the state, for its part, argues that Only rarely will the court hold a hearing and allow the interrogation of declarants.
I cannot accept any of these interpretations.
Regulation 10 The Torts Regulations stipulate, as stated, that the hearing of the plaintiff's application according to Section 7b(c) as well as in the employee's request according to Section 7B(d) It will take place in accordance with the rules set out in the Civil Procedure Regulations regarding written requests, with the necessary changes and subject to the provisions set out in the Torts Regulations themselves. Regulation 241(d) The Civil Procedure Regulations allow the court to rule on a written request on the basis of the request and its responses, or if it deems it necessary, after interrogating the declarants of their affidavits. In other words, and insofar as we are dealing with written motions, there is no obligation to hold a hearing on the application, and the same is true with requests according to Section 7b(c) or 7B(d) to the Ordinance, to which it has applied Regulation 10 The above are the procedures set out in the Civil Procedure Regulations regarding written requests. Therefore, we should not accept Flexer's approach that there is a duty to uphold