header-logo header-logo

05 July 2018
Issue: 7800 / Categories: Legal News , Profession
printer mail-detail

'One court, one judiciary' to become a reality?

The idea of a ‘one-stop shop’ for dispute resolution is an increasingly attainable prize as the modernisation of the courts gets underway, according to a QC.

Writing in this week’s NLJ, Steven Gasztowicz QC, Cornerstone Barristers, recalls how he proposed merging all the civil courts into ‘one court’ 30 years ago as a junior barrister, in a 'no doubt rather naive' paper that he sent to the then Leader of his circuit, Igor Judge QC. Judge agreed with the proposals but thought them too big a change to be taken seriously by the powers that be.

However, the Chancellor of the High Court, Sir Geoffrey Vos, is now advocating alterations that go further, incorporating tribunals as well. The former Lord Chief Justice, Lord Thomas with the Senior President of Tribunals issued a joint statement in favour of ‘one judiciary’ in 2016. There is increasing closeness between courts and tribunals, for example, for the past decade all High Court and circuit judges have also been judges of the First-tier Tribunal and Upper Tribunal; and a pilot scheme began in 2017 where judges were ‘double-hatted’ to sit as county court judges and tribunal judges at the same time.

The courts have also become closer—in 2014, the individual county courts were replaced by a single county court operating from different locations.

Gasztowicz writes: ‘It remains to be seen to what extent a fundamental alignment of the different courts and tribunals, their judiciary and jurisdictions, will come about and when.

‘There are, as I have noted, a lot of changes already in the wind with which to contend. However, once these “modernisation” changes have taken effect at least, it would not be surprising if, with the force of the current Chancellor behind it, as well as the thinking of the last Lord Chief Justice, and the Senior President of Tribunals, such a transformation moves forward.’

Issue: 7800 / Categories: Legal News , Profession
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Investigations and corporate crime expert joins as partner

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Veteran funds specialist joins investment funds team

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Firm enhances competition practice with London partner hire

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll