Slaughter: Comprehensive review essential
The government’s rejection of MPs’ call for an “urgent and comprehensive” review of the county court risks perpetuating a “dysfunctional” system, the justice select committee has warned.
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) said that it instead wanted to get on with improving the system without further delay.
The cross-party committee today published the MoJ’s response to the report it issued in July [1] on the work of the county court, which labelled it a “dysfunctional operation that has failed to adequately deliver civil justice across England and Wales”.
The report said it was “not tenable” to continue without fundamental reform and that there needed to be an “urgent and comprehensive, root-and-branch review” that would create a plan for reducing the “entrenched” and “systemic” delays and inefficiencies.
This was one of two recommendations – out of 25 in all – that the MoJ rejected outright, while seven were accepted in part and the rest in full.
It said: “The inquiry itself has provided a solid foundation and highlighted the areas of the county court’s operation that need urgent attention.
“Rather than focusing on a root and branch review of the county court, the government is keen to focus on taking tangible and practical steps to improve the operation of the county court – which will benefit everyday users – without further delay. We are already seeing these measures bear fruit.”
The other rejected recommendation was that litigants must be able to recover from HM Courts & Tribunals Service the legal, travel and subsistence costs wasted as a result of over-listing and/or poor court administration preventing their cases from being heard.
The MoJ said: “Listing is a judicial function, and over-listing is necessary due to the large volumes of cases that will settle before their hearing (approx. 45%), as this ensures that judicial resourcing and sitting day utilisation are maximised.
“Over-listing is managed carefully. We consider that the better strategic solution to this issue is improved, data-informed listing.”
Among the recommendations accepted was to reduce delays to pre-2015 levels by the end of this Parliament and for greater use of remote hearings.
“HMCTS is developing a remote participation strategy that takes a cross-jurisdictional view of how remote hearings can be used much more strategically across the justice system,” it said.
Justice minister Sarah Sackman pointed to signs of improving performance, such as the most recent quarterly civil justice statistics [2], which showed “promising progress” on delays.
She continued: “A combination of steps taken are driving this improvement, including our work to reduce call waiting times, and to improve performance at key locations where it had dipped, including the Civil National Business Centre and sites such as Central London County Court.
“Our new digital services are proving their worth in supporting swifter access to justice with reduced processing times, and more engagement with the justice system as evidenced by higher levels of defended claims for cases issued on Online Civil Money Claims and the Damages service.
“And we are innovating. In tandem with our work to expand the reach of our digital services we are implementing tactical improvements in electronic document management through the Civil Auto File Share (CAFS) project, and the HMCTS’ small claims mediation service is helping more people than ever to reach a consensual resolution of their dispute, sooner.”
The CAFS project, which will be delivered by the end of the year, promises to “end the slow and costly practice of the Civil National Business Centre producing paper files and posting them to courts with the risk of them being mislaid and where they then need to be stored”.
Justice committee chair and Labour MP Andy Slaughter said: “It is right the MoJ has acknowledged the county court ‘faces substantial challenges, and the performance needs to improve’…
“It is welcome the MoJ has accepted or partially accepted the committee’s recommendations in relation to ‘unacceptable’ delays, recruitment and retention issues across frontline staff and the judiciary, the complex “patchwork” of paper-based and digital systems in the county court and the ‘significant disrepair’ of the court estate.
“However, a comprehensive review of the county court is essential for establishing a sustainable plan to reduce the systemic delays and inefficiencies entrenched across its operations. Without it, it is unclear how fundamental reform will be achieved.”
Matthew Maxwell-Scott, executive director of the Association of Consumer Support Organisations, said Ms Sackman’s “very constructive response” showed she was “prepared to grasp the nettle and do something about the dire state of the county court”.
That the government accepted most of the recommendations was “a testament to the committee’s work in getting to the heart of the problems and providing ministers with a specific set of issues to tackle.
“We now have clear targets and timelines to measure success against and to hold the Ministry of Justice and HMCTS to account.”