header-logo header-logo

Lawyers highlight risks of courts project

25 July 2018
Issue: 7803 / Categories: Legal News , Legal services , Profession
printer mail-detail

Transformation programme may ‘fail to deliver expected benefits’, committee warns

Family lawyers and barristers have hit out at the government following a scathing report on the £1.2bn courts modernisation project.

The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) last week warned of a ‘significant risk that HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) will fail to deliver the benefits it expects’, in its report, Transforming Courts and Tribunals. It said the government’s timetable was unrealistic, consultation inadequate and that the changes—closing courts, introducing virtual hearings, digitising paper services and centralising services—could have unforeseen consequences for taxpayers, court users and justice.

Welcoming the report, Jo Edwards, who gave evidence to PAC’s inquiry on behalf of family lawyers’ group Resolution, said Resolution members regularly reported delays in their local courts, and that one in two said in a Resolution survey that the court they’ve used historically was earmarked for closure.

‘Officials need to ensure the programme delivers real improvements to the courts system, without further restricting access to justice, and isn’t simply a cost-cutting exercise,’ she said.

Andrew Walker QC, chair of the Bar, which also raised its concerns to the inquiry, said: ‘Engagement with the Bar has been fraught with practical difficulties of HMCTS’s making, and too often barristers and the Bar Council have wasted the valuable time that they are being asked to give to this (entirely at their own expense).

‘We are also not satisfied that sufficient attention is being paid to the implications that digitising legal processes, and the widespread use of video technology, may have for justice and fairness in every case. This must include ensuring that independent legal advice is received when it is needed most, especially before individuals make decisions that may have important implications, such as before indicating a likely plea when you are charged with a criminal offence.

‘HMCTS has been reluctant to address this issue, as the availability of legal advice is not part of its design brief.’

However, HMCTS CEO Susan Acland-Hood said: ‘We do recognise the need to engage more actively with our key stakeholders, and this is a key priority over the next phase of reform. This is a challenging programme but we remain confident that it is on track.’

Issue: 7803 / Categories: Legal News , Legal services , Profession
printer mail-details
RELATED ARTICLES

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Arc Pensions Law—Ian D’Costa

Arc Pensions Law—Ian D’Costa

Pensions firm welcomes legal director in London

Shakespeare Martineau—Jonathan Warren

Shakespeare Martineau—Jonathan Warren

Real estate disputes team strengthened by London partner hire

Morgan Lewis—Christian Tuddenham

Morgan Lewis—Christian Tuddenham

Litigation partner joins disputes team in London

NEWS
Government plans for offender ‘restriction zones’ risk creating ‘digital cages’ that blur punishment with surveillance, warns Henrietta Ronson, partner at Corker Binning, in this week's issue of NLJ
Louise Uphill, senior associate at Moore Barlow LLP, dissects the faltering rollout of the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 in this week's NLJ
Judgments are ‘worthless without enforcement’, says HHJ Karen Walden-Smith, senior circuit judge and chair of the Civil Justice Council’s enforcement working group. In this week's NLJ, she breaks down the CJC’s April 2025 report, which identified systemic flaws and proposed 39 reforms, from modernising procedures to protecting vulnerable debtors
Writing in NLJ this week, Katherine Harding and Charlotte Finley of Penningtons Manches Cooper examine Standish v Standish [2025] UKSC 26, the Supreme Court ruling that narrowed what counts as matrimonial property, and its potential impact upon claims under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975
In this week's NLJ, Dr Jon Robins, editor of The Justice Gap and lecturer at Brighton University, reports on a campaign to posthumously exonerate Christine Keeler. 60 years after her perjury conviction, Keeler’s son Seymour Platt has petitioned the king to exercise the royal prerogative of mercy, arguing she was a victim of violence and moral hypocrisy, not deceit. Supported by Felicity Gerry KC, the dossier brands the conviction 'the ultimate in slut-shaming'
back-to-top-scroll