- 6 A A at the time of the inter partes hearing should not be what has happened in the past but what should happen in the future. On the hearing of the inter partes motion it is impossible to make any concluded finding of fact, yet the court is being asked to reach a conclusion on the issue of non-disclosure without full knowledge of the circumstances. This attempt involves a minute examination of detailed allegations and counter-allegations, the exact materiality of which may not be clear to the judge in the interlocutory hearing, in circumstances when that is not necessary for the future conduct of the case. B C D E F G H 16. B C D E The cost in time and money to the parties in a complex case can become vast and the waste of court time quite unacceptable. …” F In Dormeuil Frères the evidence and the exhibits extended to H G more than 750 pages as observed by Sir Nicolas Browne-Wilkinson VC at I I p 1369. J J 17. K L M voluminous. There are over 19 lever arch files of documents of over 3,000 pages. 18. N P 19. K L And also at p 1369 Sir Nicolas Browne-Wilkinson VC said: “ In my judgment, save in exceptional cases, it is not the correct procedure to apply to discharge an ex parte injunction on the grounds of lack of full disclosure at the interlocutory stage of the proceedings. The purpose of interlocutory proceedings is to regulate the future of the case until trial.” O Q In the present case, the evidence and documentary exhibits are As he observed at p 1370, the sole relevance of whether the M N O P Q ex parte order should be set aside is to determine the question whether the R S T plaintiff is liable on the cross-undertaking in damages given on the ex parte hearing. That is not an urgent matter. And as he said: “… It is normally much better dealt with at trial by the trial judge who knows all the circumstances of the case and is able, after cross-examination, to test the veracity of the witnesses.” R S T U U V V