Comparative methodological and theoretical approaches are easily applicable to a deeper
level understanding and higher level utilisation of civil procedure. But, they are not typically
at the forefront of work in civil procedure, whether by practitioners, the courts, or even the
academics that study civil procedure. This is because civil procedure is particularly local in
character - applying to the participants within a specific and localised jurisdiction.1 This is
reinforced by local civil procedure being applied even to disputes centred on events outside
the jurisdiction, even when foreign substantive law may be brought into the dispute through
choice of law rules.2 Civil procedure is, after all, designed to apply within the four corners
of the court. Thus, those involved, particularly the lawyers and judges that work with civil
procedure, have not typically considered foreign and hence comparative civil procedure.
Comparative considerations of civil procedure have been generally confined to academics,
and occasionally to policy makers considering reform. Yet, as will be shown in this chapter,
even as civil procedure is perhaps the most practical and domestic of all fields of law, those
that work with it could nonetheless find significant benefits from occasional comparative
considerations of civil procedure.