The plaintiff made a late application two days before the assessment of damage hearing to file a witness statement and to give further discovery out of time.

Master Marlene Ng chastised the plaintiff for such late application and said that “last minute applications fly in the face of the underlying objectives of reasonable expedition, procedural economy, costs-effectiveness and fairness between the parties“. Master Marlene Ng further stressed that after the implementation of the Civil Justice Reform, if there is any last minute application, the court will expect a full account for the lateness of the application, and expect the applicant to place before the court full justification as to why the application should be entertained at all at such late stage notwithstanding the underlying objectives. The judgment provides guidance on the expectation of the court regarding efficient handling of cases and the importance of adherence to the prescribed timetable.

CJR Alerter: For full analysis of this case subscribe to the Sweet & Maxwell CJR Alerter, produced in association with Clifford Chance.

This article is available in [2009] 18 CJRA.