The draft civil procedure rules were published in July 1998.

The final rules are expected next month, and practice directions and forms will be published later.

The Court Service plans a series of explanatory leaflets which are likely to be as welcome to practitioners as litigants.

Much familiar vocabulary will change - for example, claim forms for writs, summonses and originating application and litigator's friend for next friend and guardian ad litem - so as to emphasise that a new civil procedure code is being introduced.

And then there are the protocols, much of which later.

So far, two protocols have been published which are for clinical negligence cases and other personal injury cases.

Although they await a practice direction to give them real life, the personal injury protocol is already being voluntarily operated by some solicitors and insurers.

The protocol for road traffic accidents will probably not be brought into force until the end of next year.The gridlock prophetOne certainty is that there will be no increase in work in the civil courts system post-April.

Work has gone down steadily over recent years.

Queen's Bench Division writs were down from 50,295 in 93/94 to 22,483 in 97/98, and county court summonses from 2,577,704 to 1,959,958.

In the same period the number of district judges increased from 289 to 337.

Last year 46% of county court summonses were issued by electronic means from the summons production centre.

After April, outside London, most court managers will amalgamate their district registries with the county court and the same numerical sequence will be used to issue both High Court and county court claims.

Lawyers will be able to distinguish a High Court claim from a county court claim purely from the heading.

There will be no other differences because the rules, forms and orders will be common to both courts.In a nutshellAfter April, when a defence is filed, the parties will receive, within two months, a timetable order that includes the prospective date for trial.

Family practitioners have worked to a timetable for years.

The claimant will lose control of the progress of the action because setting down for trial will disappear.

The timescale of litigation will be shorter and more certain.

The need for pre-issue preparation is increased.

Professor Hazel Gene's research into settled personal injury actions showed that, in most claims, 60% of costs were incurred before proceedings.Big bang for quiet daysUnder the transitional provision, it appears likely that from April the Supreme Court and county court rules will be revoked.

Unfortunately, the new rules will only contain the core of the old ones.

By sleight of hand, the ne w rules will apply the rump of the old that will reappear in the schedule.

The old rules that relate to housing, enforcement and courts of special jurisdiction will continue until they are progressively replaced.

There are two significant consequences.

First, the new rules will apply immediately to pre-April claims.

After 26 April, most case reports about the old rules can be burned as they will cease to have any application.

The new rules about disclosure of documents and the use of expert evidence are striking examples of the break with the past.

Where the old rules have been re-enacted, they will be applied subject to the over-riding objective of part 1 of the new rules.

Secondly, whenever an action comes to the attention of a judge, the court will be under a duty to bring the action within the case management system.

At any interlocutory appointment, expect the court to issue a timetable order and give a prospective date for trial.User ever-so-friendlyThe new rules are in standard English.

Each part will deal with a particular topic.

And, as far as possible, each part will follow a standard order: the purpose of the process, the type of case in which it may be used, the grounds to be established, the procedure to be followed and the court's powers.

To keep the rules as short as possible, material has been extracted and included in a practice direction printed immediately after the part to which it relates.That over-riding objectiveThe rules are declared to be a new procedural code with the over-riding objective of enabling the court to deal with cases justly.

Dealing with a case justly will include, so far as practicable, ensuring that the parties are on an equal footing and saving expense.

The court is to seek to give effect to the over-riding objective when it exercises any discretion given by the rules or interprets the meaning of any rule.

A checklist of factors will apply.

Among them are the amount of money involved, the complexity of the issues, the parties' financial positions, how the case can be dealt with expeditiously and fairly and allotting an appropriate share of the court's resources while taking into account the needs of other cases.Broader questions inThe new rules will not be subject to a literal or strict interpretation.

Interpretation is to be purposive to furthering the over-riding objective.

'What does this rule mean?' That narrow question will never again be posed.

Broader questions will be asked to enable the court to consider the balance of prejudice and the economic consequences of the proposed order.

Orders that are appropriate to one claim may be inappropriate in a similar claim whose value is larger or smaller.

In future, the decisions of the Court of Appeal are more likely to illustrate the application of the new rules to the facts of a particular case as opposed to being interpretive authorities that define the meaning of the rules.

It is intended that the procedure will concentrate on the resolution of particular issues in larger claims in contrast to the present procedure that has usually presumed a comprehensive trial of every possible issue.-- Changes in principle are still being made.

Any amendments will be made in future columns.