Скачать или смотреть UCPR (Qld) rr 366–367 — Directions & Case Management: the Court’s Steering Wheel

What these rules do, in one line: rr 366–367 give Queensland courts a broad, flexible steering wheel to manage civil cases—fast-tracking what matters, trimming what doesn’t, and keeping the hearing fair.

r 366 — Application for directions (the “when” and “who”)

Applies to all courts, including the Court of Appeal. The power to shape how a proceeding runs isn’t limited to trial courts.

Any time, by anyone: The court may give directions at any time, and any party may apply at any time—as a stand-alone application or piggy-backed on another application.

Practical note: Chapter 11, Part 8 (exchange of correspondence instead of affidavit evidence) can be used for applications under this Part, and there are additional provisions for Magistrates Courts.

Big picture: The rule recognises that modern litigation needs proactive, ongoing case management—not just orders at milestones, but timely course-corrections whenever they’re needed.

r 367 — Directions (the “what” and “how”)

Ultra-flexible power: The court may make any order or direction about the conduct of a proceeding it considers appropriate—even if it is inconsistent with another UCPR provision. If there’s a clash, the court’s direction prevails to the extent of the inconsistency.

Paramount test: In deciding whether to make directions, the interests of justice are paramount. That lodestar informs both whether directions are made and their scope.

Non-exhaustive toolkit (examples): At any time, the court can—

require pleading bundles for the court’s use;

limit trial/hearing time overall, or each party’s time to present;

require evidence to be by affidavit, orally, or in another form;

cap witness numbers, including experts;

set time limits for examination, cross-examination and re-examination;

direct how submissions are made (written/oral/hybrid), and limit their length;

require pre-trial witness statements.

Guiding considerations: When deploying those tools, the court can weigh factors like: each party’s right to a fair trial, reasonableness of timelines, complexity and importance of the case, volume/character of evidence, expected hearing length, number of witnesses, opportunities to lead evidence and cross-examine, and the state of the court lists (i.e., backlog/efficiency needs).

Always adjustable: The court may vary or revoke any direction whenever needed.

How this plays out in real life

Case management culture: These rules sit within a broader framework (including Supreme and District Court Practice Directions) that pushes cases toward just, efficient resolution. Expect active timetabling, page-limits, affidavit directions, and firm trial caps.

Beyond what’s asked: Courts can make orders beyond the precise relief an applicant sought, if doing so serves the interests of justice and efficient management.

Course corrections mid-stream: Judges may revisit earlier procedural rulings during a proceeding if fairness requires it—another expression of the supervisory role rr 366–367 codify.

Written vs oral evidence: Directions to use affidavit-in-chief are common in civil lists to save time; courts may carve-out genuinely controversial parts for oral evidence to preserve credibility assessments while keeping efficiency gains for the rest.

Consistency with r 5 philosophy: Everything ties back to UCPR r 5’s objective—just, expeditious resolution at minimum expense, without undue technicality.