header-logo header-logo

08 June 2018 / Roger Smith
Issue: 7796 / Categories: Opinion
printer mail-detail

Transforming the courts

nlj_7796_smith

Despite the efforts underway to bring the courts into the 21st century, a wider audit may still be required, says Roger Smith

You can see why ministers would approve the court modernisation programme. It has been set up to have zero financial risk. To put the underlying argument bluntly: overrun on budget? Flog another court. Even so, the National Audit Office (NAO) and now the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee (PAC) are sniffing around with concerns. The former counselled that ‘delivering change on this scale at pace means that the HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) risks making decisions before it understands the system-wide consequences’. The latter is just beginning an inquiry to which it has summonsed Richard Heaton and Susan Acland-Hood, the respective heads of the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) and HMCTS.

The concern of the NAO and the PAC is primarily financial. They are worried that the wheeze of court sales will run out of steam and there will be a cost to the treasury after all. As the NAO noted, even in HMCTS

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll