‘The judgment addresses the question of whether a fact-finding hearing should continue either remotely or semi-remotely or whether the case should be adjourned until an in-person hearing of pre-Covid 19 format can take place.’
Park Square Barristers, 19th May 2020
Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk
‘Remote hearings have been a successful emergency measure but should not be taken as establishing a settled mode of operation for the family courts after Covid-19, a leading judge has warned.’
Legal Futures, 26th May 2020
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘Cases involving bigamy are relatively rare, and the judgment of Williams J in Padero-Mernagh v Mernagh provides a useful analysis of the relevant law in that regard. Of particular note, however, is the way in which the final hearing was dealt with remotely, in light of the COVID-19 pandemic.’
Family Law, 28th May 2020
Source: www.familylaw.co.uk
‘The Law Society has urged the President of the Family Division to issue “best practice” and “top tips” rather than full prescriptive guidance on remote hearings.’
Local Government Lawyer, 27th May 2020
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘COVID-19 has taken a hammer to the already fragile transparency in our justice system. Open justice means that justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done. While journalists and court reporters can bring what happens in court to houses around the country, public access to our courts ensures judges and lawyers are sufficiently scrutinised. The coronavirus pandemic and the transition to virtual courts has all but severed public access to magistrates’ courts, risking the routine occurrence of miscarriages of justice with little prospect of correction.’
Transparency Project, 27th May 2020
Source: www.transparencyproject.org.uk
‘The pandemic has led to big changes in trials, many of of which are likely to be permanent.’
The Guardian, 24th May 2020
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘The criminal justice system in England and Wales is facing a backlog of 40,000 criminal cases, which will not be solved even if all crown courts are brought into service under physical distancing rules, the Criminal Bar Association has warned.’
The Guardian, 24th May 2020
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘As a result of the Covid-19 pandemic, on 19 March 2020, the Lord Chief Justice delivered a message in respect of the Civil & Family Courts in which he said: “The default position now in all jurisdictions must be that hearings should be conducted with one, more than one, or all participants attending remotely.” Legal professionals are naturally anxious to know what may be expected of them in practically in preparation for such hearings.’
Falcon Chambers, May 2020
Source: www.falcon-chambers.com
‘It is “vitally important” that remote hearings are not accepted as the “new normal” in the civil courts after the coronavirus pandemic passes without substantial work on the quality of justice delivered, the Law Society has warned.’
Litigation Futures, 21st May 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Following the rapid consultation on the use of remote hearings in the family justice system, undertaken by the Nuffield Family Justice Observatory at the request of the President of the Family Division, the Civil Justice Council have now embarked on a similar consultation in relation to the civil courts.’
Transparency Project, 19th May 2020
Source: www.transparencyproject.org.uk
‘Whether a case proceeds by remote hearing must be decided on the sometimes competing factors of the individual case. However, pushing forward to achieve remote hearings must not be at the expense of a fair and just process. The decision of the President distils a number of key principles to be borne in mind. Just because a matter can be heard remotely does not mean it must be. In this case the delay in proceedings was outweighed by the fact that the hearing could not be properly or fairly conducted without the physical presence of the mother before the judge in the courtroom. As a result of that decision, the President re-listed the matter until such time that the restrictions relating to Covid-19 are lifted.’
Park Square Barristers, 14th May 2020
Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk
‘The county court has responded rapidly to the sudden and unprecedented change to its working practices. However, the move to remote hearings has brought a marked decline in the retention of existing listings. Many litigants have found their hearings adjourned by the court even when those hearings were, on the face of it, suitable for hearing remotely.’
3PB, 12th May 2020
Source: www.3pb.co.uk
‘The view that careful adherence to proper legal process and appropriate authorisation of deprivations of liberty may now, at times, be required to give way to other pressing welfare priorities is “entirely misconceived”, the Vice President of the Court of Protection has warned.’
Local Government Lawyer, 15th May 2020
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘ The case deals with whether to proceed with lay evidence remotely or to adjourn part heard having heard the medical evidence over a period of 5 days via Zoom. The case concerns an application for a care order for a 4 year child. In April 2019, his two month old sister died at home. The post mortem established that his sister had sustained 65 fractures to her body as well as brain injuries. As a result the child was made the subject of an interim care order in April 2019.’
Broadway House Chambers, 14th May 2020
Source: broadwayhouse.co.uk
‘Are our courts just buildings or something more? What role does the physical courtroom play? Rapid steps towards remote hearings today, while essential during the pandemic, could also inform future decisions on court closures warns Lorna Cameron.’
Counsel, May 2020
Source: www.counselmagazine.co.uk
‘This is the second case relating to the welfare of children to reach the Court of Appeal on the issue of remote hearings during the Covid-19 pandemic. The same panel of judges who dealt with Re A presided in this case. You can find the decision Re A here and Re B here.’
Broadway House Chambers, 11th May 2020
Source: broadwayhouse.co.uk
‘Disagreement and divergent approaches to this question persist since the Coronavirus Act 2020 amended the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 (CDA 1998). The position as at 1 May 2020 is as follows. John Oliver discusses for Lexis Nexis PSL.’
5SAH, 13th May 2020
Source: www.5sah.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024