Ask a Law Question, Get an Answer ASAP!
If they are now talking about discussions to settle then fine - the court expects the parties to do this in any event so to unreasonably refuse may not look good in the eyes of the court.
It shows a weakness on their part though as clearly they have changed their tune and probably realise the risks they face if they do not now settle. I would propose a JSM (joint settlement meeting) at a venue (their law firm's offices or somewhere more neutral). A JSM is very expensive for them as if they use a lawyer, it is a full day of a lawyer's time. If they want to meet in person this is the best way forwards in my view as it puts even more pressure on them to settle.
Does this clarify?
If they are represented then their lawyer will be present, yes. You could have someone with you too if you wanted - https://www.absolutebarrister.com or http://www.lpc-law.co.uk could both provide a lawyer for you
I hope this helps – if you can please rate the answer by clicking the 5 stars (the top of your screen & then click “submit”), I can answer follow up Q&A's at no extra charge and I will be credited for helping you today.
No, as you are making an assumption which is not enough to prove a lie or fraud - you can say instead :
“unless you reply by 4pm on *7 days from now* I will invite the court to draw adverse inferences from this additional piece of evidence’