Practice

In determining whether the defendant was entitled to an adjournment in order to call a witness, the starting point was the overriding objective with the court having to ensure that the parties were on an equal footing; that the case was dealt with proportionately, expeditiously and fairly; and that an appropriate share of the court’s resources was allotted, taking into account the need to allot resources to other cases. A court when considering a contested application at the eleventh hour to adjourn the trial, should have specific regard to: (a) the parties’ conduct and the reason for the delays; (b) the extent to which the consequences of the delays could be overcome before the trial; (c) the extent to which a fair trial may have been jeopardised by the delays; (d) specific matters affecting the trial, such as illness of a critical witness and the like; and (e) the consequences of an adjournment for the parties and the court.