I am receiving instructions for fast track trials where the parties prepare and agree timetables for trial. It does seem, however, the timetables are not realistic. I can understand why. It is because, as with many litigators (including myself back in the day), they do not get exposed to trials (or regularly) to know what is an appropriate timetable.
I am not ashamed to admit that I would use precedent timetables for when the Court ask for a timetable. So I thought I would prepare a post to assist litigators about what to think about when
Why do Courts want timetables?
Time managment is important. What the Court wants to do is avoid matters being part-heard or having reserved Judgment unless absolutely necessary. We have an adversarial system and it is for the parties to bring the issues to the Court to determine (not for the Court to decide what the issues are).
Therefore the Court is dependant on the parties to be able to explain what the issues are (statement of issues, which is another post for another day) and how long each stage of the trial will be needed.
Templates I see regularly
I have seen this template regularly. I am unsure if it is a ‘proclaim’ template but it happens often.
__________________________________________________________
TRIAL TIMETABLE
__________________________________________________________
- Opening speeches by Counsel 10.00-11.00
- Claimant’s evidence 11.00-12.00
- Cross examination and re examination 12.00-13.00
- Lunch 13.00-14.00
- Defendant’s evidence 14.00-15.00
- Cross examination and re examination 15.00 -15.30
- Summing up and Closing speeches 15.30-16.00
- Judgment 16.00-16.30
One of the first things that stood out to me from this daft timetable were items 2 and 5. An hour for the Claimant and Defendant’s evidence? This obviously cannot be correct because in civil proceedings, witness statements are relied on in lieu of formal evidence in chief. This is different compared with criminal trials where evidence in chief is given live in the witness box.
There is usually no consideration given to the number of witnesses are being called for each party (the Defendant may not be calling any witnesses or maybe calling more but with less to attest to). Again, that is understandable.
What usually happens at a Fast Track Trial
In my experience an opening at a Fast Track Trial only happens when the issues are convoluted or unclear. The Judge wants to ascertain what they need to determine and this tends to be an open discussion with the advcoates. However, this can be an invitation by the Judge for the Claimant’s advocate to make a brief opening and, potentially, for the Defendant’s advocate to add anything else.
Another circumstance is where the Judge explains that they’ve not had the opportunity for a detailed review of the papers and would benefit from a summary.
I find it to be rare to have an opening for a fast-track trial. Based on my experience, the Judge will confirm their familiarity with the papers, outline the issues to be decided, and inquire about any additional matters that need to be addressed.
What is the best way to prepare an accurate time table?
Take the opportunity to observe some fast-track trials. This will allow you to see what happens and how long each part takes. Discuss the issue of drafting a timetable with more senior fee earners or even counsel. Keep in mind that each case will have its own unique facts, so you will need to conduct an analysis. While I would recommend asking your trial advocate, you may not be briefing them until after you file the timetable with the trial bundle.
In particular, here are a few points:-
- How many witnesses are each party calling?
- What is each witness discussing?
- Even if they have a short statement, are there issues that might be put to the witness by the other party’s advocate?
- Are the witnesses giving evidence in English? Cross-examination through a translator is very time consuming
- Will there be any house keeping or applications heard at the start of the matter?
- How many live issues are to be determined? If quantum, liability or causation is the only issue in dispute, then it can be the case that submissions and Judgment will be shorter
However, for peace of mind, it doesn’t matter if the timetable isn’t accurate or if you’re uncertain. Ultimately, the proceedings will happen as the Judge deemsimated trial duration is correct. This question can be addressed in a separate post on another day.
Information
AJH Advocacy Limited, a Limited Company which is regulated by the Bar Standards Boards (entity number 190758), ceases trading on the 12th January 2026.
From the 12th January 2026 and onwards, Alec Hancock will practice as a Barrister at Magdalen Chambers in Exeter. For instructions on matters on or after 12th January 2026, please contact Magdalen Chambers via clerks@magdalenchambers.co.uk or by telephone on 01392 285 200.