header-logo header-logo

Court reform: proceed with caution

29 March 2018 / Andrew Walker KC
Issue: 7787 / Categories: Opinion , Legal aid focus , Profession , Technology
printer mail-detail
andrew_walker_for_chairs_column_site

Andrew Walker QC reflects on the impact of a lack of consultation & the challenges of rushed court reforms

Those who suggest that the Bar is set against the court reform programme are wrong. There is much that we support, but not all.

When they speak of court reform, many think only of technology or investment in infrastructure, and that will be my focus here, but there are strands to the programme that have little, if anything, to do with these. The aim, for example, to broaden the range of judicial decisions that are made by non-judges (and even non-lawyers), under the ‘supervision’ of judges, is more concerned with greater centralisation of services and with savings in the judicial salaries budget. Whether or not this is truly a matter of ‘reform’, it is critical that judicial decisions should continue to be made by judges, independently from the executive branch of government.

So far as technology and infrastructure are concerned, a sum of around £1.1bn is being spent on this, across

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll