header-logo header-logo

17 December 2021
Issue: 7961 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Covid-19
printer mail-detail

Remote hearings raised judges’ stress levels

Three out of five judges and more than half of lawyers say remote hearings affected their health and wellbeing, according to an HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) report

The most common issue reported by judges was increased fatigue, followed by a rise in stress, a heavier workload and fewer breaks. The lawyers, while appreciating the reduction in travel and waiting times, found the hearings more tiring, missed the interaction in court and found work and home boundaries more challenging.

The HMCTS report, ‘Evaluation of remote hearings during the COVID 19 pandemic’, published last week, highlighted difficulties where hearings required interpreters. For example, the interpreter or signer not being visible to their client, not audible and the hearing taking longer than usual.

Nearly four out of five public users attended the remote hearing from their home, which made it harder for them to communicate with their legal representative during the hearing. Lack of communication about delays and cancellations of remote hearings also proved troublesome for 36% of legal representatives and their clients.

The most important factor when deciding whether to hold the hearing remotely was the vulnerability of parties. Other key factors were length and complexity of hearing, seriousness of outcome, stated preference of public users and health considerations. Where remote hearings involved vulnerable individuals, those individuals were particularly less likely to find it easy to communicate with their lawyer―41% disagreed it was easy compared to 29% of individuals not classed as vulnerable.

One in five public users experienced technical difficulties during the hearing, the main issues being audio quality and connection. Despite this, there were few adjournments and only a handful of public users reported difficulties accessing the hearing.

Law Society president I Stephanie Boyce said the research ‘reflects concerns we have raised that in some scenarios they are unsuitable and can have a serious impact on access to justice and may not be suitable for vulnerable people’. Law Society research in September 2020, Law under lockdown, found only 16% of solicitors felt vulnerable clients could participate effectively in remote hearings, and only 45% were confident non-vulnerable clients could do so.

Issue: 7961 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Covid-19
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
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
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll