A solicitor may feel pleased at having survived the Civil Procedures Rules 1998 (CPR) to the point of the filing of a defence.

Then, whichever side the solicitor is on, through the post comes a form, or rather a booklet, calling itself an allocation questionnaire.

Solicitors are required to answer it.

The answers will help the procedural judge, usually a district judge or master, to allocate the cl aim to the appropriate track: small claims, fast or multi.How much is normal?The value of the claim is the main factor which determines the track to which it is allocated, but that is the value which the procedural judge puts on the amount in dispute in the claim, disregarding interest, costs and any question of contributory negligence.

If £25,000 of a claim for £30,000 is admitted, the value is £5,000.Generally, if the value is no more than £5,000, the normal track will be small claims.

There are exceptions.

A personal injury claim where general damages exceed £1,000 - special damages do not count - is excluded.So is a residential tenant's claim for repairs if the cost of repairs or any damages claim exceeds £1,000.If small claims is not the normal track for a claim up to £15,000, then its normal track will be the fast track.

Again there are exceptions.

The procedural judge must consider that the trial will last no more than five hours and that oral expert evidence will be limited to one expert per party in no more than two fields.

The procedural judge will allow for the trial judge's new powers to control the trial and to limit the time spent on evidence.The multi-track is simplicity itself.

It is the normal track for any claim for which the normal track is not the small claims or fast track.Normal, but...The procedural judge may allocate the claim to its normal track or to some other track.

If it includes a claim by a tenant for harassment or unlawful eviction, it must not be allocated to the small claims track.

The procedural judge will consider the value but also the type of remedy sought, likely complexity, number of parties, value of any counterclaim and any other part 20 (formerly third party) claim, amount of oral evidence, importance to non-parties, the views of the parties and their circumstances.

The judge cannot allocate to a lower value track than the normal track without the parties' consent.Questions in the allocation questionnaire'Do you wish there to be a one month stay to attempt to settle the case?'This has an: 'If not, why not?' flavour.

After all, given the timetabling which is to follow, there may not be a great deal of time for relaxed settlement discussion later.

Alternative dispute resolution facilities are already widespread and expanding.

A stay can be ordered without the parties' consent.

If the attempts at settlement look as if they are bearing fruit, the stay may be extended.The question 'Which track do you consider to be suitable?' should be easy to answer by now.

'Have you complied with any pre-action protocol?' will be straightforward, too.

(See 'Benchmarks' [1999] Gazette, 6 January, 27.)The question: 'Do you intend to apply for summary judgment or leave to issue a claim against a new party?' should be no strain.

Although note that if that is the intention, the court will want to get that out of the way if possible before allocating, and may deal with allocation at the application hearing.As for the question: 'What witnesses of fact do you intend to call?' - who thinks about witnesses so early in the case? Solicitors should do - from now on.

'Don't know' will positively not be an acceptable answer.

Not only does the court need a reasonable idea of the likely extent of the evidence in order to allocate, but it will expect solicitors to have started preparation for trial.Now come seven questions about expert witnesses.

The emphasis is on single experts, jointly instructed.

By this point, the parties are expected to have agreed a common expert.

'If no, please expla in why not?' is actually written in the questionnaire.

If the parties want to use expert evidence at all, they will have to get permission.

If they want to call oral expert evidence they will have to justify doing so.Now come questions about the trial location, representation and time estimate.

They will give a few moments relaxation before being hit by requests to estimate costs to date - these can be read off the computer - and likely overall costs.That may cause a bit more thoughtful pencil-sucking, but the client is probably asking the same questions anyway.

Those questions are to do with proportionality.

Is the client running up a huge expense in costs for the sake of a piffling issue?The overriding objective (r.1.1) means the court needs to know - and will do something about it if that is what the client had in mind.The final section invites agreed directions.

The practice directions to parts 26 to 29 of the CPR, which explain what is expected, should be read.

'Set down on certificates of readiness' will not be sufficient.

That went out with the ark, or at least with Bannister, and will certainly never be seen again after the 26 April 1999.And if the solicitor does not......

get the form back in time, or give sensible answers, he will be hauled into an allocation hearing.

The trainee cannot be sent in the solicitor's place.

He will not get his costs.An 'unless' order might be made.

If the other side's solicitors have done it properly, the solicitor will probably end up paying their costs...

assessed...

on the indemnity basis...

within 14 days.And then......

the court sends an allocation notice giving directions appropriate to the case and the track.District Judge Vincent sits at Worcester County Court.