NORWAY Law and Practice Contributed by: Knud Jacob Knudsen, Jenny Sandvig, Oda Lauksund Engamo and Nicholas Foss Barbantonis, Advokatfirmaet Simonsen Vogt Wiig
For proceedings before a conciliation board, the conciliation board will serve the complaint to the defendant if it proceeds with the case, together with an order to file a reply within a time limit, which shall normally be fixed at two weeks. After the reply is submitted, the preparation of the case is finished, and the conciliation board shall summon the parties to a meeting to hear the case. The meeting should take place within three months after the complaint is submitted. For proceedings in the court of first instance, the court will set a time limit for the defendant to submit the reply to the writ of summons (both after the general procedure and after the small claim procedure), which is normally three weeks (Section 9-3 of the Dispute Act, first paragraph, second sentence), unless the court decides that the reply shall be submitted at a court hearing during the preparatory stage (Section 9-5 of the Dispute Act). Immediately after the reply has been submitted, the court continues the prepa- ration of the case. Discovery in the traditional Anglo-American sense is not available in civil cases in Norway. The general rule is that the parties are obliged to produce the evidence requested, provided that the demand is sufficiently specified. There are several exceptions to this rule, and there is also a general requirement of proportionality between the evidence requested and the importance of the dispute. The right to demand evidence is consequently somewhat different and more lim- ited than “discovery” in the traditional sense. 5. Discovery 5.1 Discovery and Civil Cases
Regarding witnesses, the general rule is that anyone who has something to explain of impor- tance to the case is obliged to give a witness testimony, provided it is likely that the person has something relevant to explain. If this require- ment is met, the person can be ordered to give a witness testimony. There are exceptions to this rule. Claims for access to evidence are normally sub- mitted in a pleading. The opposing party will then produce the evidence if they agree that the claim is in accordance with the rules. If the par- ties disagree on whether there is an obligation to present evidence, the court must decide. 5.2 Discovery and Third Parties As discovery in the traditional Anglo-American sense is not available in civil cases, it is also not possible to obtain discovery from a third party that is not named as claimant or defend- ant. However, a third party has a similar obliga- tion as the parties to produce evidence that may constitute evidence in the case. The obligation for third parties is normally enforceable for the party that has demanded the evidence to be produced. 5.3 Discovery in This Jurisdiction The general approach to discovery in Norway is that there should be a broad right to require the opposing party to produce evidence that could be of importance to the case. However, there is also a general view that this must be proportional and balanced against other considerations. This is a part of the rationale for why traditional “dis- covery” is not permitted under Norwegian law. The rules are generally not very detailed. For example, there are no rules requiring the parties to disclose specific documents. In principle, all
1075 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook