Family Court - Psychological report - follow up questions - OTHER SIDE NOT AGREEING TO ANYTHING

[Familycourtdrama]

Hi all, some advice is needed as I am going mad with stress.
We had a psychological report earlier in the year as part of family court proceedings. The psychologist was very thorough and her overall conclusion is that the father should not have unsupervised contact and the court should be minded to terminate supervised contact and move this to indirect.
We have been asked for follow up questions to the psychologist from the CAFCASS Guardian.
My Solicitor has been back and forth with my ex partner's Solicitor regarding this questions as the questions need to be proportionate and seek clarification on the report and also be agreed by the other side as it was a joint instruction.
So far the other side have REFUSED every single question and want to ask questions that are not proportionate and basically his questions are regarding cutting corners to achieving unsupervised contact.
My question is, if we can't agree to questions what happens?
We have a hearing beginning of September so ideally we need to have had asked these questions and received an addendum report by now (the report was issued beginning of the year)
Any advice? my Solicitor is back and forth with his Solicitor but he does not agree to my questions and I don't agree to his on the basis they are not proportionate or address anything in the original report.
HELP!

Bump

If the follow up questions cannot be agreed the parties (together or 1 or more only) can apply to the court for directions so, for example, you want to ask questions about a, b and c so your solicitor can make an application either at the next hearing or ideally on notice beforehand for the court to authorise questions a, b and c to be put to the psychologist. Other party will obviously be able to put their arguments as to why questions about x, y, z should be asked instead of as well as a, b, c.
This all delays matters and increases costs hence worth you asking your solicitor about giving a deadline to reach agreement in default of which they apply to court and seek costs of that aspect from the other party (whether that's a valid approach depends on how egregiously unreasonable other side is being)

Thank you, that is really helpful. Just feels never ending