26 mars 2020
Disputes Quick Read – 87 de 105 Publications
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.
To learn more about the future of litigation, subscribe to the latest season of our new legal podcast, Sidebar.
Andrew Howell and Natalia Faekova unpack an extraordinary case. A Mexican billionaire's strong fraud claim. Former Israeli intelligence operatives hired to target the defendant's solicitor. Secret recordings over wine and dinner. A judge who called it 'anathema to civil litigation' but may have been 'too lenient'.
19 novembre 2025
During an LSLA lecture on transparency and open justice, Mrs Justice Cockerill, recently appointed as Deputy Head of Civil Justice, outlined a pilot practice direction (PD) that will place select court documents squarely in the public domain via a new, public-facing side of the electronic court file (CE-File).
21 octobre 2025
11 juin 2025
30 janvier 2025
6 décembre 2024
14 novembre 2024
14 novembre 2024
15 octobre 2024
14 décembre 2023
13 décembre 2023
17 octobre 2023
4 août 2023
21 juillet 2023
10 juillet 2023
1 juin 2023
20 avril 2023
8 mars 2023
14 février 2023
13 février 2023
8 février 2023
19 janvier 2023
3 octobre 2022
22 septembre 2022
9 août 2022
25 juillet 2022
6 juillet 2022
Welcome news for those pursuing fraud claims in the English Courts
28 juillet 2022
27 juillet 2022
29 juillet 2022
17 juin 2022
13 juin 2022
26 mai 2022
31 mai 2022
4 avril 2022
5 avril 2022
31 mars 2022
21 septembre 2021
13 septembre 2021
6 septembre 2021
2 août 2021
21 juillet 2021
15 juillet 2021
5 mai 2021
21 avril 2021
31 mars 2021
26 février 2021
24 février 2021
20 janvier 2021
12 janvier 2021
23 novembre 2020
16 octobre 2020
23 septembre 2020
7 octobre 2020
15 avril 2020
27 avril 2020
21 avril 2020
2 juin 2020
16 juin 2020
9 juillet 2020
21 juillet 2020
3 décembre 2021
24 novembre 2021
8 octobre 2021
10 janvier 2022
20 janvier 2022
22 mars 2022
7 avril 2022