When several related cases with different territorial jurisdiction sit in one court, on what basis may the court send some of them to another court?
General information · Not legal advice
Material to check
In a practice file of this kind, we read the papers showing where each case is laid — the place of the alleged act, the defendant's residence — the material showing that the cases are related, and any ruling by which the court severed and transferred one of them.
These are types of material to look for, not evidence already verified by PRO SE.
Where readings differ
One reading takes the provision as a power held by the court: where several related cases whose territorial jurisdiction differs are pending in the same court, and there is no need to hear them together, the court may, by a ruling, sever them and transfer them to another court that has jurisdiction.
Another reading stresses that the power rests on two findings the court must make — that the cases are related and that consolidated hearing is unnecessary — and the provision does not say how either is shown, who may contest them, or whether a party can appeal the ruling.
Your judgment
What in the record would show that hearing the related cases together is unnecessary, rather than merely inconvenient?
PRO SE does not make this decision or keep a case record on this public site.When to reconsider
We look at this again if the provision is amended to define related cases or to limit the court's discretion, or if a court decision explains when severance for want of a need to hear cases together may be ordered.