header-logo header-logo

20 April 2018 / Helen Pugh , Michael Fletcher
Issue: 7789 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Technology
printer mail-detail

Trial technology (Pt 3)

nlj_7787_fletcher_0

In their third update on trial technology Michael Fletcher & Helen Pugh discuss the drivers for change

The legal community has perhaps been too slow to adopt electronic technology at trial, but, despite the ‘stumbling blocks’ discussed in the last update (see ‘Trial technology’ (Pt 2), 13 April 2018), there are now a number of drivers for change.

First, the courts are increasingly encouraging the use of court-room technology. The shift to mandatory e-filing in the Business & Property Courts is a step in this direction; the obvious progression from paperless filing is paperless bundles. From a purely practical perspective, e-bundles will be far easier for court staff to manage, they take no storage space at court, and are therefore likely to save costs.

Judges also now appreciate the advantages of technology more and, as time passes, are inevitably becoming more digitally astute. Several years ago, many High Court judges would have regarded the idea of an electronic trial bundle with suspicion. Now, the question we are increasingly seeing asked at the

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

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