Authors

Andrew Howell

Partner

Read More

Laurence Lieberman

Partner

Read More

Stuart Broom

Partner

Read More
Authors

Andrew Howell

Partner

Read More

Laurence Lieberman

Partner

Read More

Stuart Broom

Partner

Read More

26 March 2020

Disputes Quick Read – 70 of 87 Insights

Disputes Quick Read: Embracing remote hearings – the experience to date

  • Quick read

There is (understandably) a deluge of guidance being issued on a daily basis by the various courts which are grappling with the practical impact of COVID-19 on the operation of the justice system.

The courts have, it seems, embraced the adoption of technology to resolve disputes, be that conference calls or video conferences over Skype, Zoom or similar applications. All judicial laptops now have Skype for Business enabled.

On 25 March 2020, the Supreme Court issued its first judgment remotely – giving us a fine view of what we assume to be Lord Justice Kerr's private collection of law reports – and in a well-publicised success in the family courts, Mostyn J completed a five party final hearing with evidence from 11 witnesses and the press attending remotely.

While there have been some teething problems (and these will no doubt continue) the direction of travel is clear. Discretion ultimately resides with the judiciary regarding how or whether a hearing should proceed, but they and the parties have shown a willingness to cooperate and to facilitate remote hearings.

When faced with adjourning a trial last week, Teare J reportedly commented that the default position is that hearings should be conducted with one or more participants attending remotely, the court should take an optimistic approach to how this will work, and it is the duty of all parties to seek to co-operate. That must be the right approach in these difficult times.

The protocol for remote hearings in the civil justice system (published on 20 March 2020) sets out some practical steps. It encourages parties to take a proactive approach to forthcoming hearings, hold short directions hearings (if necessary) to discuss and agree how best to use the technology, and prepare and file electronic bundles.

A new practice direction (51Y) was issued on 25 March 2020, providing further guidance on video or audio hearings during the pandemic, dealing largely with privacy aspects of remote hearings.

As experience grows, guidance can be fine-tuned. In the meantime, parties and the judiciary should continue to work together to find practical solutions, often backed by technology, to the operational problems caused by the current outbreak.

Find out more

To learn more about the future of litigation, subscribe to the latest season of our new legal podcast, Sidebar.

Subscribe

In this series

Disputes & investigations

New SFO Director announces bold plans to tackle fraud

21 March 2024

by Multiple authors

Disputes & investigations

What are the litigation trends for 2024?

1 February 2024

by Katie Chandler, Emma Allen

Disputes & investigations

ClientEarth v FCA: Challenging Regulator Decisions

12 February 2024

by Tim Strong, Nicole Baldev

Disputes & investigations

First of its kind judicial guidance on the use of AI in the courts

14 December 2023

Disputes & investigations

The use of AI in Trial Witness Statements post-PD 57AC

23 October 2023

by Multiple authors

Disputes & investigations

Failure to prevent fraud – a new offence?

14 August 2023

by Multiple authors

Disputes & investigations

Supreme Court rules that APP fraud victims cannot rely on Quincecare Duty

4 August 2023

by Multiple authors

Disputes & investigations

Disputes Quick Read: ClientEarth refused permission to pursue directors of Shell

1 June 2023

by Multiple authors

Disputes & investigations

CJC costs review – what will change?

1 June 2023

by James Bryden, Helen Robinson

Disputes & investigations

Embargoed judgments – dos and don'ts

16 May 2023

by Stephanie High

Cryptoassets, blockchain and distributed ledger technology

Disputes Quick Read: New obligations on cryptobusinesses to report under the UK sanctions regime

9 August 2022

by Nick Maday

Disputes & investigations

Disputes Quick Read: New gateway for serving Norwich Pharmacal Orders and Bankers Trust orders out of the jurisdiction

Welcome news for those pursuing fraud claims in the English Courts

28 July 2022

by Emma Allen, Samantha Brendish

Disputes & investigations

Disputes Quick Read: Care required when drafting SPA claim notices

23 September 2020

by Multiple authors

Disputes & investigations

Disputes Quick Read: Tomlin Orders – ensuring the confidentiality of settlement terms

27 April 2020

by Multiple authors

Disputes & investigations

Disputes Quick Read: Commercial Court's arbitral power shift

21 February 2020

by Andrew Howell

Disputes & investigations

Disputes quick read: pilot error?

13 February 2020

by Andrew Howell

Disputes & investigations

Disputes Quick Read: Privilege waiver warning

2 July 2020

by Tim Strong, Georgina Jones

Disputes & investigations

Disputes Quick Read: Dealing in crypto? Be careful what you call it

7 April 2022

by Multiple authors

Call To Action Arrow Image

Latest insights in your inbox

Subscribe to newsletters on topics relevant to you.

Subscribe
Subscribe

Related Insights

Disputes & investigations

The use of AI in Trial Witness Statements post-PD 57AC

23 October 2023
Quick read

by multiple authors

Click here to find out more
Private wealth

The fine art of acquiring authentic artworks

18 July 2023
Quick read

by multiple authors

Click here to find out more
Disputes & investigations

The limits of a professional's duty of care

1 February 2023
In-depth analysis

by Stuart Broom and Joe Pengelly

Click here to find out more