Legally, a Joinder is the combination of two or more legal issues. From a procedural point of view, a Joinder allows for multiple issues to be heard at a hearing or trial and is implemented when the issues or parties involved overlap sufficiently to make the process more efficient or equitable. It helps courts not to hear the same facts repeatedly or to see the same parties appear separately in court for each of their disputes. This term is also used in the area of treaties to describe the accession of new parties to an existing agreement. This also raises other practical implications, such as the right of the architect to take a position in the first decision. I see no evidence of this in the amendments proposed by Edward-Stuart J. to the TeCSA rules. The Joinder of the parties also finds itself in two categories: permissive Joinder and Compulsory Joinder. Mandatory membership is governed by the Federal Civil Procedure Regulation 19, which requires the membership of certain parties. The parties that need to be brought together are those that are necessary and indispensable to litigation.
The rule includes several reasons why this might be the case, even if that party has an interest in the litigation that it cannot protect if it has not joined. For example, if three parties each claim land and the first two pursue each other, the third party may not be able to protect the (alleged) interest in the property if it has not joined. Another circumstance is that a party may end up with inconsistent obligations, for example.B. it may be invited by two different courts to grant exclusive rights to the same property to two different parties. This is avoided by joining the parties in legal action. However, while the “necessary” parties must join if this Joinder is possible, the dispute will continue without them if membership is impossible, for example if the court is not competent for the party. On the other hand, if “indispensable” parties cannot be members, the dispute cannot be pursued. Courts have some discretion in determining which parts are essential, although the federal code contains certain guidelines.  In arbitration proceedings, the partners of the parties usually appear in major employer/contracting disputes in which the principal contractor joins the subcontractor, possibly in the event of default and/or delay. But there`s a difference. Not only must all parties agree to the Joinder, but the parties` rights and remedies are generally considered separately. It is only the facts common to the three parties and the factual findings that are then applied to the contracts and claims that arise.