The oral element of civil court procedure continues to diminish.

Landmarks have been the introduction of the exchange of w itness statements and judges' expectation that the parties will provide skeleton arguments.

The Civil Procedure Rules 1998 push civil procedure farther in the direction of written argument.The known: applications for court ordersIt is trite to say that the best advocates say least because they have prepared well.

What every judge requires on opening the file is an introduction to the claim.A case summary prepared by either party is always heartening.

In varying proportions, the ingredients should include a description of the case background and the questions the court will finally have to decide.

A chronology of the significant events often helps but is not always necessary.Lastly, set out an overview of the issues in the application, then get down to the argument.

When the application involves consideration of a number of documents, a directed reading list helps greatly, indicating what must be read, in what order and what may be ignored.

Paragraph 12 of the part 23 practice directions says: 'Except in the most simple application, the applicant should bring to any hearing a draft of the order sought'.In the Royal Courts of Justice, the draft can be on a disk and some other courts may also accept electronic versions.A draft order, nowadays, includes an estimate of the costs incidental to the application (see [1999] Gazette, 10 February, 38).

If the judge has pre-read the papers, the application has a flying start and there is often little left to say.

Where there remains an oral element, it is limited to an expansion of the outline submission.Not too much meatA case summary/skeleton argument must be no more than that.

The law of diminishing returns rapidly arrives.When the solicitor files the case summary, he should make sure that the court staff do not mistake it for low priority material for filing.

Write 'urgent -- for judge's attention' in red ink, and include the appointment date and time.The unknown: case management conferencesUnlike traditional directions hearings, there should be nothing routine about these hearings.

Case management conferences will usually be in multi-track claims where the court has decided that the procedural timetable cannot be given without a hearing (see [1999] Gazette, 17 February, 40).The purpose of the conference is to set an agenda before significant costs have been incurred.

Where the parties have exchanged or agreed a short statement of issues before the hearing, this should help everyone to decide what to do.Practitioners should anticipate the questions that the procedural judge will ask about the claim and the necessary procedural steps.

The hearing will be a discussion or business meeting where the purpose is to agree the details of procedural steps that the practice direction requires the court to include in the procedural timetable.It is unlikely there will be any formal advocacy at these appointments.

It is vital that the advocate who appears has the case file, knows the facts and is not instructed at the last minute, because the date of trial is fixed at this appointment.And finally: the trial-- The judge will generally have read the trial papers.

Skeleton arguments should be included in the judge's bundle.-- When the trial starts, there will be some discussion between the judge and the advocates, but there will be no formal opening.-- The witnesses will confirm the content of their statements.

A witness of fact may be bowled a soft ball or two to get his or her eye in before cross-examination, but examination in chief, as we have known it, will now be rare.-- Cross-examination will be limited by the trial timetable.

The clock will stop the discursive cross-examiner.

No longer will irrelevant cross-examination lengthen the trial.-- Final submissions will be based on the skeleton arguments and in most cases will take the form of a discussion of the issues with the judge.-- After judgment there may be lengthier submissions about costs than formerly.ConclusionsJudges vary but generally, there will be little scope for formal speeches.

Each party will have only one submission, at the end of the trial, when the evidence is closed.

The submission will generally develop the summary of the written submission.Only cross-examination, probably the most important and defining aspect, survives from the traditional form of common law trial.