header-logo header-logo

COVID hours not working, says Law Society

16 December 2020
Categories: Legal News , Covid-19 , Profession
printer mail-detail
COVID operating hours are ‘potentially discriminatory’ and ‘unlikely to have a significant impact’ on the backlog of cases in the criminal courts, the Law Society has warned

The extended operating hours have been piloted at seven Crown Court centres as part of HM Courts and Tribunals (HMCTS) plans to tackle the criminal cases backlog, which now stands at more than 53,000 in the Crown Courts and 479,000 in the magistrates’ courts. Trials are currently being listed for 2022.

HMCTS has consulted on whether to extend the extra hours model to a further 65 courts from January.

However, David Greene, president of the Law Society, said: ‘After years of underfunding and cuts, there was already a significant backlog in the criminal courts which has been exacerbated by the pandemic.

‘Although more cases have been disposed of during COVID operating hours, it appears to have been largely due to the fact that shorter, less complex cases are allocated for these times, which means that a greater number of cases can be allocated, and therefore a greater number of those cases crack. It's our view that the vast majority of the benefits observed in the pilots would equally have been delivered had the same mix of cases been allocated to courts operating normal court hours.

‘Given the additional costs of running COVID operating hours courts we do not believe these proposals deliver value for money for the taxpayer or will achieve the objective of clearing the backlog. We are also concerned about the potential for discrimination to members with caring responsibilities.’

Greene suggested the extra resources used to run COVID operating hours be diverted into opening more Nightingale courts to increase court capacity.

The Bar Council is also strongly opposed to COVID operating hours.

Categories: Legal News , Covid-19 , Profession
printer mail-details

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