{"id":8220,"date":"2022-03-28T11:58:24","date_gmt":"2022-03-28T15:58:24","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/360mediations.com\/en\/?p=8220"},"modified":"2022-03-28T11:58:27","modified_gmt":"2022-03-28T15:58:27","slug":"when-an-opposing-party-fails-to-attend-at-a-hearing","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mail.360mediations.com\/en\/when-an-opposing-party-fails-to-attend-at-a-hearing\/","title":{"rendered":"When an Opposing Party Fails to Attend at a Hearing"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

The Divisional Court ruled that despite the absence of any formal requirement, in certain situations it would be prudent for courts or tribunals to call parties who fail to attend at the start of a hearing.<\/p>\n

Absenteeism at hearings is not unusual, and it often raises a dilemma for the presiding judge or arbitrator.\u00a0 Indeed, during the pandemic, hearings were often held remotely or virtually, with fixed time slots, and sometimes with little-to-no staff support.\u00a0 The last thing a judge or arbitrator wishes to do is spend time trying to track down a absent party through a series of phone calls and\/or emails.\u00a0 The Divisional Court confirmed that it is not a requirement for the judge\/arbitrator\/court\/tribunal to chase absent parties down, however, the Divisional Court went on to say that in certain situations it may be prudent to try and reach out to the absent party or their counsel.<\/p>\n

Although the court did not define the circumstances that would make such a call or follow-up prudent, the court did highlight the factors made a call or follow-up prudent in the case before them, which was:<\/p>\n