header-logo header-logo

25 July 2018
Issue: 7803 / Categories: Legal News , Legal services , Profession
printer mail-detail

Lawyers highlight risks of courts project

Transformation programme may ‘fail to deliver expected benefits’, committee warns

Family lawyers and barristers have hit out at the government following a scathing report on the £1.2bn courts modernisation project.

The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) last week warned of a ‘significant risk that HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) will fail to deliver the benefits it expects’, in its report, Transforming Courts and Tribunals. It said the government’s timetable was unrealistic, consultation inadequate and that the changes—closing courts, introducing virtual hearings, digitising paper services and centralising services—could have unforeseen consequences for taxpayers, court users and justice.

Welcoming the report, Jo Edwards, who gave evidence to PAC’s inquiry on behalf of family lawyers’ group Resolution, said Resolution members regularly reported delays in their local courts, and that one in two said in a Resolution survey that the court they’ve used historically was earmarked for closure.

‘Officials need to ensure the programme delivers real improvements to the courts system, without further restricting access to justice, and isn’t simply a cost-cutting exercise,’ she said.

Andrew Walker QC, chair of the Bar, which also raised its concerns to the inquiry, said: ‘Engagement with the Bar has been fraught with practical difficulties of HMCTS’s making, and too often barristers and the Bar Council have wasted the valuable time that they are being asked to give to this (entirely at their own expense).

‘We are also not satisfied that sufficient attention is being paid to the implications that digitising legal processes, and the widespread use of video technology, may have for justice and fairness in every case. This must include ensuring that independent legal advice is received when it is needed most, especially before individuals make decisions that may have important implications, such as before indicating a likely plea when you are charged with a criminal offence.

‘HMCTS has been reluctant to address this issue, as the availability of legal advice is not part of its design brief.’

However, HMCTS CEO Susan Acland-Hood said: ‘We do recognise the need to engage more actively with our key stakeholders, and this is a key priority over the next phase of reform. This is a challenging programme but we remain confident that it is on track.’

Issue: 7803 / Categories: Legal News , Legal services , Profession
printer mail-details
RELATED ARTICLES

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