header-logo header-logo

14 January 2016
Issue: 7682 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Briggs Review backs online court

Litigants bringing claims up to £25,000 could access court without lawyers

The Briggs Review has recommended setting up an online court for claims up to £25,000, which litigants could access without lawyers.

In his interim report of the Civil Courts Structure Review, published this week, Lord Justice Briggs identifies “a clear and pressing need” for an online court, which would give litigants effective access to justice “without having to incur the disproportionate cost of using lawyers.

The online court would process cases in three stages: first, a largely automated, interactive process to identify the issues and provide documentary evidence; second, conciliation and case management by case officers; and third, resolution by judges. On screen, telephone, face-to-face and video meetings would be held to discuss each case.

The case officers would take over some of the judge’s more routine tasks, but parties would have a right to have these decisions reconsidered by a judge.

Briggs LJ is consulting on the basic details of the process. Practitioners are asked for their views on whether the online court should be a branch of the county court governed by the Civil Procedure Rules or entirely separate, what types of claims should be included, the appeal process, and whether the losing side should pay the other side’s costs.

Written responses must be submitted before the end of February.

As for the existing civil courts, Briggs LJ says it is a priority to put in place the structure and software for all the re-organised courts as soon as possible, provide extra training and staff for judges, and ease the burden on the Court of Appeal.

He wants a stronger concentration of civil expertise among the circuit judges and district judges, and for all civil work with a regional connection to be tried in the regions, regardless of value.

Welcoming the interim report, Lord Thomas, the Lord Chief Justice, said: “The time is ripe for reform, and it is in any event essential and unavoidable.”

Briggs LJ began his review of civil court structures and judicial processes last July, will publish a fuller consultation by the end of May, and will complete his review by the end of July 2016.

Issue: 7682 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Nick Vernon, Walkers Bermuda

NLJ Career Profile: Nick Vernon, Walkers Bermuda

Nick Vernon of Walkers on swapping Birmingham for Bermuda and building an employment practice by the sea

Bird & Bird—Christian Bartsch

Bird & Bird—Christian Bartsch

Global firm re-elects CEO for second term

Fletchers Group—Miriam Hall

Fletchers Group—Miriam Hall

Business appoints managing director of operational excellence

NEWS

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
back-to-top-scroll