header-logo header-logo

23 April 2020
Categories: Legal News , Covid-19 , Criminal , Profession
printer mail-detail

COVID-19: Jury trials halted

All new jury trials are to be postponed but a working group has been set up to consider how to re-start them, the Lord Chief Justice has announced

In a statement on 23 March, Lord Burnett said the decision would ‘ensure the safety of everyone in our court buildings’ during the pandemic. He committed to keeping the situation under regular review.

A judicial working group, chaired by Mr Justice Edis, will consider ways to re-start some jury trials once it is safe to do so. It will report to Lord Burnett, and includes representatives from the Law Society, Bar Council, Criminal Bar Association, HM Courts and Tribunals Service, Crown Prosecution Service, Prisoner Escorting and Court Service, Ministry of Justice, National Offender Management Service and Legal Aid Agency.

Lord Burnett initially said on 23 March that no jury trials should take place ‘unless it is safe for them to do so’.

Suggestions for reopening jury trials have been floated by several commentators, including moving to seven-member juries (as happened during the Second World War), holding trials in larger buildings such as cinemas to allow appropriate social distancing, and jurors taking part remotely. However, the buildings would need to be modified and there could be fairness issues with remote juries.

Criminal Bar Association chair Caroline Goodwin QC said: ‘Remote hearings involving screen only access strikes at the heart of the right to fair trial under article 6 of the European Convention on human rights which is put into play if defendants do not understand the court process or are not actively engaged… There are far too many opportunities for outside influences to exist, which would be completely unknown to the judge and may in certain circumstances leave individual jurors highly vulnerable and open to, at best influence and at worst intimidation and/or manipulation.

‘The rigours of having a jury in the controlled and managed environment of a designated court building, are essential so as to be able to control the flow of information to a jury panel whilst receiving evidence.’

Goodwin also highlighted the need to ‘address funding to ensure the courts reopen, fully and safely, thus reversing fully the cuts to court sitting days that have, without question, exacerbated the extra delays building up since the pandemic commenced and trials suspended’. She said: ‘We entered 2020 with a criminal case backlog of around 37,500, a two year high and up by an unacceptable 13% on the year before, and that was before the last quarter of yet further delays and even before COVID-19 brought trials to a shuddering halt at the end of March.’

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
The legal profession’s claim to be a ‘guardian of fairness’ is under scrutiny after stark findings on gender imbalance and opaque progression. Writing in NLJ this week, Joshua Purser of No5 Barristers’ Chambers and Govindi Deerasinghe of Global 50/50 warn that leadership remains dominated by a narrow elite, with men holding 71% of top court roles
A legal challenge to police disclosure rules has failed, reinforcing a push for transparency in policing. In NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth examines a case where the Metropolitan Police required officers to declare membership of groups like the Freemasons
Bereavement leave is undergoing a quiet but profound transformation. Writing in NLJ this week, Robert Hargreaves of York St John University explains how the Employment Rights Act 2025 introduces a day-one right to leave for a wider range of losses, alongside new provisions for pregnancy loss and bereaved partners
Courts are beginning to grapple with whether AI-generated material is legally privileged—and the answers are mixed. In this week's issue of NLJ, Stacie Bourton, Tom Whittaker & Beata Kolodziej of Burges Salmon examine US rulings showing how easily privilege can be lost
New guidance seeks to bring order to the growing use of artificial intelligence (AI) in expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Minesh Tanna and David Bridge of Simmons & Simmons set out a framework stressing ‘transparency’, ‘explainability’ and ‘reliability’
back-to-top-scroll