While the use of remote hearings for short or uncontroversial procedural business is unobjectionable and welcome, careful consideration is required before any decision on further use, the Bar Council of England & Wales, Bar of Ireland, Bar Council of Northern Ireland and Faculty of Advocates of Scotland said in a united statement this week.
The four Bars said there were ‘multiple and multi-faceted disadvantages with such hearings’ when compared to in-person hearings and in-person should remain the default. They highlighted their experiences that judicial interaction is ‘different and less satisfactory’ in remote hearings and it is more difficult to isolate issues and develop arguments.
In remote hearings, the management of witnesses, especially in cross-examination, was ‘far less satisfactory’, and could adversely affect the quality of evidence. They added that there were ‘very considerable challenges to effective advocacy in cases involving evidence or complex narrative submissions’.
In-person hearings were better able to protect the diverse and complex needs of clients, they said.
