The overriding objective
If you're doing a civil case the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) govern them. That means that you need to bear in mind what the rules say when considering what procedural steps you take, and how you take them. However clever a lawyer you are, you need to understand the procedures in order to be able to use that legal knowledge.
^ TOP1999 code
CPR was introduced in 1999 as a new procedural code. The idea is that this is largely a fresh start designed to make courts more user efficient and friendly. The rules are set out in a series of parts, 76 in all, with various additional materials referred to. The procedural rules also have detailed notes on them explaining how they have been applied in cases. They are set out in the civil procedure service known as the White Book (which unsurprisingly is white).
^ TOPOverriding objective
Part one of the rules (CPR Part 1) sets out the overriding objective. If you are in court you will rarely cite the overriding objective. That is because applying the overriding objective is so obvious it goes without saying. If you tell a judge what the overriding objective says, and tell him he should bear it in mind, you are as good as telling him he is an idiot who does not understand the first thing about what he's doing. The overriding objective expressly says that the court has to seek to give effect to it when exercising any powers given by the rules or interpreting any rules. The only exception to that is, in prevention of terrorism cases the court's duty under CPR Part 76.2 to ensure that information is not disclosed contrary to the public interest takes precedence over the overriding objective. But in every other case, whether using its powers or deciding what the rules mean, the court has to take account of the overriding objective. Whilst not telling the court what the overriding objective is, often your submissions (your argument to the judge) should be ensuring that the judge sees why you say that the overriding objective is best served by doing what you want the judge to do, rather than what the other side wants the judge to do.
^ TOPEqual footing
The overriding objective says that the court should deal with cases justly. That involves insofar as practicable: ensuring that the parties are on equal footing; saving expense; dealing with the case in ways proportionate to the importance of the case, the amount of money involved, how complex it is and the financial position of the parties; ensuring that the case is dealt with as quickly as possible and as fairly as possible; and giving it appropriate court time and resources whilst taking account of the needs of other cases.
^ TOPActive role
The court also has a duty to actively manage cases in order to further the overriding objective. That means it is not just down to the parties to control the progress of a case. Now the court is to take an active role in how the case proceeds. The idea being to ensure that only those issues that need determining are determined, and are determined in a cost-effective manner.
^ TOPCooperation
The court is also to encourage the parties to cooperate with each other. The parties under CPR Part 1.3 are also under a duty to help the court to further the overriding objective. Therefore they are supposed to try and co-operate reasonably and sensibly to ensure that the case is dealt with as quickly, as fairly and as economically as possible. If a party fails to do that then it will be risking a costs order against it if a judge takes a dim view of the failure to comply with the overriding objective.
^ TOPApply the objective
If you want to be involved in a civil court case (or if you become involved in one even though you don't want to be!) you have to understand the overriding objective, and have to understand how to try and apply it to the issues you have to deal with. Since the judge knows he has to try and comply with the overriding objective, your job in arguing a case is to try and show the judge that doing what you want him to do best serves that.