header-logo header-logo

Nightingale courts or remote juries?

14 April 2021
Issue: 7928 / Categories: Legal News , Covid-19 , Criminal , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail
Lawyers have called for more Nightingale courts and judicial sitting days to tackle the backlog of cases and urged caution on plans for remote jury trials.

Ministers are considering legislation to give criminal courts more discretionary powers to use live links, after the Coronavirus Act 2020 expires next March. According to the impact assessment document for the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill, this could ‘make it possible in the future, for example, for a jury, sitting collectively, to participate in a trial by “live video link” where the court considered this appropriate. Remote participation by a jury would only be considered at the discretion of the trial judge where there is good and sufficient reason to operate in this way’.

In Scotland, remote jury trials have been taking place since September 2020 with jurors watching proceedings from socially distanced seats in a cinema.

Law Society president I Stephanie Boyce said: ‘There would need to be clear evidence of how juries sitting remotely will help to increase capacity to clear the backlogs before such a change is considered.

‘Additionally, more work needs to be done to fully understand the impact remote hearings have on justice outcomes, as the Ministry of Justice and HM Courts and Tribunals Service have acknowledged. Juries being able to sit remotely would also be reliant on the widespread availability of high-quality and extremely reliable technology.

‘Maximising existing court capacity and judicial sitting days and boosting capacity through many more Nightingale courts is the best way of increasing the amount of jury trials that can take place safely.’

Criminal Bar Association chair James Mulholland QC, in this week’s Monday Message for members, said: ‘The focus for the next few months must continue to be the relentless pursuit of more court space for more in person jury trials. It is as simple as that.’

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
back-to-top-scroll