Posts Tagged ‘HM Court and Tribunals service’
Covid 19 and the English Legal System (13): Justice Committee reports on the impact on the Courts and on the Legal Profession
I have noted before that a number of Parliamentary Committees are examining aspects of the impact of Covid 19. The Justice Committee is in the middle of publishing a series of reports on this question. The first two of these, on Courts and on the Legal Profession have been published (30 July 2020 and 3 Aug 2020).
Both reports are, inevitably, in the nature of interim reports – given that we are still in the middle of a crisis, the outcome of which is far from clear.
The first report, on the Courts, takes up the widespread criticism that there were already considerable backlogs and unacceptable delays in the criminal justice system which have been exacerbated by the arrival of Covid 19.
The Committee notes that measures being put in place to improve the performance of the Crown Courts include a possible increase in the number of sitting days and the opening of the (temporary) Nightingale Courts – specially adapted spaces in which criminal trials can be dealt with.
As regards Magistrates’ Courts, the Committee found that the end of May 2020, there were 416,600 outstanding cases in the magistrates’ courts, which is the highest backlog in recent years. (The backlog previously peaked at 327,000 outstanding cases in 2015.) By mid-June, the figure was even higher. HMCTS has promised a ‘recovery plan’; the Committee states that it looks forward to seeing it.
By contrast with the criminal justice system, the civil, administrative and family systems have fared relatively better. Much of this has been the result of the ability of the courts and tribunals service to move hearings online. The Committee repeats concerns raised elsewhere, for example about enabling those who find it hard to use IT to participate, and that some types of family dispute are hard to deal with online.
The Committee stresses the importance of HMCTS undertaking proper evaluations of the impact of these new procedures on users of the system. It also emphasises that changes in practice arising out of the need to respond to the pandemic should not be adopted on a permanent basis, without more evaluation and consultation.
The Justice Committee report on the impact on the legal profession is not as general as its title might suggest. It focusses primarily on the impact on legal aid practitioners and other advice agencies, arguing that they continue to need financial support if the provision of services – particularly in criminal cases – is not to be lost.
The Committee’s report on the impact of Covid 19 on the Courts is at https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5801/cmselect/cmjust/519/51905.htm
Their report on the impact of the pandemic on the legal profession is at https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5801/cmselect/cmjust/520/52003.htm
Transformation of the Justice System: reports on the progress of the HMCTS reform programme
It is a some time since I wrote about the great Transformation of the Justice system programme that was launched in 2016. It is quite a challenge to follow the progress of the reform programme. I thought it would be useful to bring together the principal documents which relate to the project which will fundamentally reshape the justice system for years to come.
- The Transformation of the Justice system project was formally launched in a joint statement issued by the Lord Chancellor, the Lord Chief Justice and the Senior President of Tribunals in September 2016.
See https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/transforming-our-justice-system-joint-statement
Initially planned for completion in 2021, the end date is currently set back to December 2023, though many parts of the programme have been completed. The principal features the programme can be seen in the following diagram.
- The programme was the subject of an initial review by the National Audit Office, published in May 2018. This is available at https://www.nao.org.uk/report/early-progress-in-transforming-courts-and-tribunals/(See this blog 7 June 2018)
- This was followed by a report from the Public Accounts Committee published in July 2018 which is available at https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmpubacc/976/97602.htm.
The PAC report resulted in six separate responses from the Government, details of which are at https://www.gov.uk/government/news/response-to-public-accounts-committee-transforming-courts-and-tribunals. (see this blog 10 March 2019)
- One issue, raised in both the above reports, related to the adequacy of HMCTS engagement with stakeholders. HMCTS responded by commissioning an independent audit of stakeholder engagement which was published in October 2019. See https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/hmcts-stakeholder-perception-audit-report-2019. A further progress report on stakeholder engagement was published in January 2020. (It can be found by googling HMCTS Engaging with our external stakeholders 2020 which leads to a Report published in Jan 2020.)
- A second report from the National Audit Office was published in September 2019. This is available at https://www.nao.org.uk/report/transforming-courts-and-tribunals-a-progress-update/
This has not to date led to a further report from the Public Accounts Committee.
- At the end of October 2019, the Justice Select Committee published its own report on the Courts and Tribunals Reform Programme. This can be found at https://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/justice-committee/inquiries/parliament-2017/court-and-tribunals-reform-inquiry-17-19/
HMCTS issued a response to this report in the form of a Press Release, which is available at https://www.gov.uk/government/news/hmcts-response-to-justice-select-committee-report-on-court-and-tribunal-reforms
- HMCTS provides updates about progress with the reform project. Initially these appeared in six-monthly updating reports which were published in 2018 and 2019. The last of this series appeared in Summer 2019. See https://www.gov.uk/guidance/hmcts-reform-programme-reform-update. Current updates are contained within the monthly blog Inside HMCTS, which is available at https://insidehmcts.blog.gov.uk/
- In each year of the project, HMCTS has run a meeting, which presents an account of progress with the programme to stakeholders. The most recent of these events was held in November 2019. The presentation slides used at this meeting are available online and present very useful picture of progress up to that date. They can be accessed from https://www.gov.uk/government/news/hmcts-hosts-3rd-annual-public-user-event. Other engagement events, both past and planned are listed at https://www.gov.uk/guidance/hmcts-reform-events-programme.
I hope that this blog entry, listing key documents and reports relating to the transformation project will be useful for those wanting to get an overview of the project and its progress. I will endeavour to keep readers up with more specific developments as they occur. For the moment, many of these have become intertwined with arrangements that have been made to adjust the work of the courts and tribunals to the effects of the Covid 19 pandemic.
Covid 19 and the English Legal System (8): guidance on new working practices
As readers of this blog will already be aware, I have been considering the impact of the Covid 19 pandemic on the English Legal System. There will, I am sure, be many more blog entries to come.
For those not involved on a daily basis in the work of courts and tribunals, it can be hard to get an overview of what is happening.
An invaluable source of information is available on the Judiciary website which brings together the vast range of advice and guidance on how courts and tribunals should be working in the current environment. Some of this advice is general – applying across the board; other advice relates to specific jurisdictions.
Access to the guidance, which is updated when necessary, is available at https://www.judiciary.uk/coronavirus-covid-19-advice-and-guidance/
Keeping the ‘Transformation: Courts and Tribunals 2022’ programme under review
In June 2018, I noted here the critical report from the National Audit Office – published in May 2018 – on the Transformation: Courts and Tribunals Programme 2022.
The NAO report was reviewed by the Public Accounts Committee , which took evidence from the Ministry of Justice and HM Courts and Tribunals Service. In July 2018, it published a pretty brutal report which listed a number of concerns about the programme and set out a number of recommendations on the way forward.
The PAC found, in summary:
- It had little confidence that HMCTS can successfully deliver this hugely ambitious programme to bring the court system into the modern age.
- It found that HMCTS had failed to articulate clearly what the transformed justice system would look like, which limits stakeholders’ ability to plan for, and influence the changes.
- Despite revising the timescale, it thought that HMCTS’s imperative to deliver at such a fast pace risked not allowing time for meaningful consultation or evaluation and could lead to unintended consequences.
-
The Committee thought HMCTS had not adequately considered how the reforms will impact access to, and the fairness of, the justice system for the people using it, many of whom are vulnerable.
-
It found that, one third of the way through the programme, the Ministry of Justice still did not understand the financial implications of its planned changes on the wider justice system.
-
The Committee remained concerned that the Ministry of Justice was taking on significant amount of change, without a clear sense of its priorities, at a time when it is facing severe financial and demand pressures.
In relation to findings 1, 2 and 4 above, the Committee wanted HMCTS to start producing update reported on a regular 6 month basis, starting in January 2019.
In relation to finding 3, it wanted, by November 2018, HMCTS to publish plans on how and when it will engage with stakeholders and be clear about how it will act on the feedback received and adjust plans if necessary.
In relation to findings 5 and 6 it recommended regular updates from the Ministry of Justice, again starting in January 2019.
The Government has just announced that it has agreed to all the PACs recommendations.
As I said in my original comment on the report from the National Audit Office, my personal view is that it is essential that the justice system is modernised. Doing nothing is not an option. While stern criticism may well help to ensure that the Director of the reform programme keeps her eye on the ball, I also think that it is important to support those working on the reform programme. Such harsh criticism could be extremely undermining of staff confidence and could paradoxically increase the chances of some of the negative outcomes listed by the Committee coming to fruition.
I will keep readers of the blog posted as and when new material is published.
The NAO report is at https://www.nao.org.uk/report/early-progress-in-transforming-courts-and-tribunals/
The PAC report is at https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmpubacc/976/97602.htm
The Government’s response is at https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/746797/CCS001_CCS1018676736-001_Treasury_Minutes_Gov_Resp_43-58_Cm9702_Web_Accessible.pdf
Transformation: Court and Tribunals 2022 – progress reports
I have observed before that it is quite hard for someone outside HM Court and Tribunal Service to keep up to date with progress with the Transforming our Justice System, now Transformation Courts and Tribunals 2022, reform programme.
For some time there has been an occasional blog, setting out information about a number of initiatives.
In recent months, a monthly Bulletin (also called an electronic Newsletter) has been launched, the latest of which, published on 1 Oct 2018 contains links to a detailed report Reform Update, Autun 2018, setting out the story so far.
The transformation programme is a very substantial one – it consists of some 50 projects. Not all of them have yet started and very few have as yet been completed. Many ideas are, quite rightly, being tested and evaluated before being nationally rolled out.
The easiest way to get an overview of the projects and their progress is to look at the summary table of the report (pp 22-26).
I will be adding further detail on these projects, dividing the information into broad subject headings.
The monthly bulletin can be accessed by clicking on the link under the heading Newsletter at https://www.gov.uk/government/news/hmcts-reform-programme.
The Reform Update report can be seen at https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/744235/Reform_Update_issue_2_September_2018.pdf
The Inside HMCTS blog can be accessed at https://insidehmcts.blog.gov.uk/
Transforming the Justice system – views from the National Audit Office
In this blog, I have tried to keep readers abreast of developments with the major Transformation of the Justice system programme. I have observed that this is not always easy and depends on keeping an eye out for press releases, blogs and now the new monthly e-bulletin issued by HM Courts and Tribunals Service.
In May 2018, the National Audit Office (NAO) published its first appraisal of how the programme is going.
Obviously the NAO is supportive of the aims of the programme, which it summarises as follows:
In 2016, HMCTS set up a portfolio of change programmes that will introduce
new technology and working practices to modernise and upgrade the justice system.
By March 2023, HMCTS expects to employ 5,000 fewer staff, reduce the number ofcases held in physical courtrooms by 2.4 million cases per year and reduce annualspending by £265 million. Savings will come from lower administrative and judicial staff costs, fewer physical hearings and running a smaller estate. As well as making savings HMCTS expects the reformed system to work better for all those involved, use court time more proportionately, and make processes more accessible to users.
The NAO report helpfully reminds readers of the scale and scope of the overall programme:
The HMCTS change portfolio consists of several related programmes, which in turnare made up of many individual projects. The major programmes are:• The HMCTS Reform Programme which is modernising processes and systemsto reduce demand on courts by moving activity out of courtrooms. For example,it will introduce online services and digital case files and expand the use of videotechnology in hearings.• The Common Platform Programme which is developing shared processesand a digital criminal justice case management system to share informationbetween HMCTS, the Crown Prosecution Service and the police. It is jointlymanaged by these organisations.• The Transforming Compliance and Enforcement Programme (TCEP) whichis upgrading systems in HMCTS’s National Compliance and Enforcement Service,used to enforce court orders such as penalties and compensation.
As part of these programmes, HMCTS is also reducing and modernising thecourt and tribunal estate and creating cross-jurisdictional hearing centres and national ‘customer service centres’. These will centralise case management and administration and provide support to the public, judges and lawyers on civil and criminal matters.
1 The scope of the programme is challenging
2 The timetable has been expanded
3 The scope of some projects has been reduced
4 Progress has been slower than expected
5 Costs have risen and likely benefits decreased
6 There remain funding gaps for the later stages.
The NAO notes that many of these points have been taken on board within HMCTS. Nonetheless, the NAO argues that more should be done to demonstrate in detail how the reformed system will work. It states that it is important to sustain the committment of all those involved in the design and delivery of the new service. It implicitly criticises the Ministry of Justice for its failure to reintroduce the legislation that will be needed to ensure that aspects of the reform programme can be implemented. The NAO warns that the scale and spped of change may result in changes having unexpected consequences. And as much of the anticipated savings arise from reductions in staff, this could actually lead to an inability to deliver the service.
The public response of HMCTS has been upbeat – as indeed it has to be. A Press Release acknowledges that the programme is challenging; it summarises a number of specific changes that have been delivered; and remains confident that the programme will be successfully delivered.
My own view is that it is very important that the transformation programme is delivered. But the managerial challenge of delivering a large scale change should not be underestimated. To date, key judicial figures have been working with HMCTS to promote the need for and advantages of change. Continued judicial leadership will be essential. But I think it would be wise to develop a wider group of ‘change champions’, particularly within the judiciary more broadly and from the legal professions. Many practitioners will accept that the current system does not serve the public well. Many will have good ideas for how things could be done more efficiently and to greater public benefit. Giving them the encouragement to voice their support for change would be highly desirable.
The NAO report is at https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Early-progess-in-transforming-courts-and-tribunals.pdf.
The HMTCS Press release is at https://www.gov.uk/government/news/hmcts-response-to-national-audit-office-report-on-court-reform-programme?utm_medium=email&utm_source=
Practitioners and academics: new alliances
In my book Introduction to the English Legal System, I argue that legal academics play an important role in the development of our understanding of the law and that their role should be given more recognition than it sometimes has had in the past. (See Chapter 9, section 9.10).
Recently, however, my interest has been stimulated by stories in the professional legal press concerning a rather different collaboration between the world of legal practice and the academic world.
A number of firms, particularly those engaged in personal injury litigation, have been working with academic statisticians and ‘decision scientists’ to try to understand what are the variables that are in play when litigation is under consideration and thus trying to understand better the risks of taking particular cases on and to predict better the potential outcome of issues that are being litigated. This may help practitioners to decide whether a case should settle, or be fought through to trial.
The firms concerned think this may be beneficial both for small value large volume groups of claims, as well as high value claims. One finding that has emerged from this work is that the models that are being used suggest that the upper level of the Judicial College Guidelines on damages for different types of injury is almost irrelevant in most cases.
It is possible that this approach might also be used by the Courts and Tribunals service to analyse cases that pass through the courts. It might help, for example, in making determinations on which cases might be suitable for the small claims track or the fast track in the allocation of civil disputes in the county court – a possibility hinted at by Sir Ernest Ryder in a recent speech where he said:
Digitisation will, if we are sensible, provide us with the opportunity to gather data on the operation of our justice systems in ways that we have often been unable to before. It provides us with the opportunity to make our justice systems more adaptive; but again, only after proper scrutiny and discussion.
It seems to me that these initiatives will grow in number in the near future. What will be needed is proper evaluation of these tools to see whether they do in fact assist in both legal and judicial practice, and how they might be developed.
For press reports on these initiatives see https://www.legalfutures.co.uk/latest-news/hodge-jones-allen-embraces-predictive-modelling-pi-work; and https://www.legalfutures.co.uk/latest-news/leading-law-firm-joins-forces-lse-professors-find-ways-predict-litigation.
Sir Ernest Ryder’s speech is at https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/ryder-spt-open-justice-luxembourg-feb-2018.pdf
Martin Partington: Introduction to the English Legal System 15th ed 2021
Oxford University Press Learning Link Resources
Martin Partington: Spotlight on the Justice System 