Short answer. You lose your objections to the faithfulness, genuineness, and due execution of the evidence marked at that pre-trial, and if you were required to bring evidence but didn't, that failure is separately deemed a waiver of presenting it — because pre-trial is mandatory and meant to be terminated promptly.
What the law says
The failure without just cause of a party and counsel to appear during pre-trial, despite notice, shall result in a waiver of any objections to the faithfulness of the reproductions marked, or their genuineness and due execution. The failure without just cause of a party and/or counsel to bring the evidence required shall be deemed a waiver of the presentation of such evidence.
Rule 18, Section 2 — Nature and [p]urpose. Read the full provision →
Pre-trial's mandatory character
The pre-trial stage under this Rule is expressly mandatory and should be terminated promptly once it begins. That underlying framing helps explain why non-appearance at pre-trial is treated so seriously rather than as some minor, easily forgiven scheduling lapse — pre-trial exists specifically to accomplish real, substantive purposes for moving the case forward, and a party's simple absence directly undermines that entire process.
The waiver for failing to appear
Where a party and counsel together fail, without any just cause, to appear during pre-trial despite having received proper notice of it, the resulting consequence is a waiver of any objections to the faithfulness of the reproductions marked at that pre-trial session, or to their genuineness and due execution. Simply not showing up costs the absent party the later ability to contest those specific evidentiary points at all.
A separate waiver for evidence not brought
The rule also separately addresses a party who does appear at pre-trial but nonetheless fails, without just cause, to bring the evidence that was actually required to be presented there. That distinct kind of failure is itself deemed a waiver of the presentation of such evidence — a consequence that is meaningfully distinct from the waiver that attaches specifically to non-appearance itself under the first part of this same rule.
Why filing judicial affidavits beforehand doesn't cure a non-appearance
Filing judicial affidavits ahead of time addresses the separate requirement to have evidence genuinely ready and properly marked before pre-trial begins, but doing so does not substitute for the party's actual, physical appearance at the pre-trial proceeding itself. Because the waiver tied to non-appearance attaches specifically to the act of failing to appear despite notice, simply having already-filed affidavits sitting on record does not prevent that particular consequence from applying if the party and counsel are, in fact, absent without just cause.
Related provisions
- Rule 18, Section 2 — Nature and [p]urpose
- Rule 18, Section 1 — When conducted
- Rule 18, Section 3 — Notice of pre