header-logo header-logo

30 June 2013
Issue: 7567 / Categories: Legal News , In Court
printer mail-detail

The end of paper

Criminal courts should be fully digital by 2016 after the government announced plan to invest £160m in IT systems across the courts and criminal justice agencies.
 

Justice minister Damian Green said the investment would include Wifi in the majority of 500 court houses; “digital evidence screens” in court for CCTV footage, video and audio evidence, and other digitally-presented evidence; police-to-court video links; new “court presentation and collaboration software”; and new IT where needed by the police and court system to reduce the use of paper.
Green said about 160 million sheets of paper are used by the courts and Crown Prosecution Service each year.

The action plan, “Transforming the Criminal Justice System” proposes greater use of digital working in the police and CJS so that building case files from the street and giving evidence via video-link is the norm not the exception. Legislation will be brought forward so that low-level crimes such as TV licence evasion and some traffic offences are dealt with outside of magistrates’ courts, while police will give digital updates to victims of more serious crimes.

Currently, a “digital court” is being piloted at Birmingham Magistrates’ Court. Chelmsford Magistrates’ Court is about to test digital evidence presentation in its courtroom.

A digital Crown Court jury trial pilot is to be conducted shortly in Croydon Crown Court, under the direction of His Honour Judge Tanzer and Professor Cheryl Thomas.

Peter Lewis, CPS chief executive, said the funding would “move us much closer towards the goal of eliminating paperwork throughout the life of a criminal case—and all of the costs and waste that come with it”.
 

Issue: 7567 / Categories: Legal News , In Court
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