header-logo header-logo

17 June 2021
Categories: Legal News , Profession , Brexit , Covid-19 , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

LNB News: Mrs Justice Cockerill speech on commercial dispute resolution post-Brexit and coronavirus (COVID-19)

Mrs Justice Cockerill has given a speech at the Dispute Resolution Forum 2021 highlighting the challenges faced by the judiciary and the court system following coronavirus (COVID-19) and Brexit. 

Lexis®Library update: Cockerill J explained the many problems that have developed as a result of remote hearings, and what needs to change to preserve the English courts as the jurisdiction of choice for dispute resolution in a post-Brexit paradigm.

Cockerill J stated in her speech that cross examination during remote hearings differs from in-person questioning in two ways. First, the quality and depth of the interaction suffers as a result of the loss of body language between counsel and witness. The second, is that in her view, witnesses tend to be more disinhibited when engaged in a remote cross examination. She reminded that the purpose of cross examination is not to make the witness feel more relaxed, but to get to the truth of a matter. Cockerill J elaborated her fear that being at home or within a safe territory, shielded from the critical eye of the judge and counsel can make it easier for a witness to lie, or not tell the whole truth.

Cockerill J pointed to another aspect of disinhibition caused by remote hearings by providing the example of the BBC case R (Finch) v Surrey County Council (Contempt) [2021] EWHC 170 (QB), where the BBC broadcasted ongoing remote hearings as it was possible to access them online.

As a second heading of her speech, in relation to coronavirus, Cockerill J shared her concern that fundamental aspects of learning are lost without in person interaction. In her view, pupils, trainee solicitors, clerks and staff, have lost learning opportunities without personal interaction and presence in court.

Cockerill J then reminded that complacency must be resisted if the English courts are to remain the favoured venue for dispute resolution.

She recommended that improvements be made to the procedural effectiveness of the courts and that the law be developed in a way that is responsive to modern financial transactions.

Finally, Cockerill J highlighted the Law Commission’s work to review the Arbitration Act 1996 and stressed the importance of not missing this opportunity to develop arbitration.

The full speech can be read here.

Source: Speech by Mrs Justice Cockerill: Learning our ABC’s: Thoughts about Commercial Dispute Resolution After Brexit and COVID

This content was first published by LNB News / Lexis®Library, a LexisNexis® company, on 16 June 2021 and is published with permission. Further information can be found at: www.lexisnexis.co.uk.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll