First of all, we should understand the problem that the traffic court can't hold a session without the plaintiff's lawyer present. Of course, this is only a theoretical statement, but in reality, there are still many people who directly choose to hold a court session without a lawyer present. Because the lawyer's role for the plaintiff is to defend the plaintiff and minimize the plaintiff's losses, if the two sides reach a consensus on the matter of hearing, then the court can be held without the lawyer's presence, but this situation must be agreed by the plaintiff.
In addition, if the two parties have reached an in-vitro settlement and the related expenses of traffic compensation have reached the point of negotiation, then the court's judgment is only a result of handling, and our parties can just be present without lawyers. Of course, if it is some special circumstances, it must be ruled out. For example, if the plaintiff does not agree to do so, then we must deal with it in order to achieve it.
To sum up, we can clearly know that the traffic court can hold a hearing in the absence of the plaintiff and the lawyer, but in fact, it must obtain the consent of the plaintiff, otherwise it cannot hold a hearing, which we must understand and know.