Read the full judgment text of HCCT000005E/1987 on BabelCite. This HIGH COURT judgment was delivered on 17 October 1989 before Godfrey J..
Procedure — Separate trials of separate issues — Court’s discretion — Policy of trying all issues together unless just and convenient to order otherwise — Review of authorities affirming restrictive approach to separate trials — Balance of convenience and justice — Construction dispute involving Government obligations under July 1982 Agreement and subsequent modifications — Government sought separate trials to limit scope and save costs — Plaintiff opposed, citing interrelated issues and risk of duplication and inconsistent findings — Court accepted plaintiff’s position — Ordered all liability issues to be tried together — Hearing set for 7 May 1990. The court emphasized that separate trials are exceptional and should be granted only if the requesting party demonstrates that such order is just and convenient, which the Government failed to do on the facts of this case.
Legal issues: Court’s power to order separate trials of separate issues
Outcome: Court ordered all liability issues to be tried together at one trial; separate trials were refused.