‘The President of the Family Division, Sir Andrew McFarlane, has launched a two-week rapid consultation on the use of remote hearings in the family justice system.’
Local Government Lawyer, 14th April 2020
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘Courts and tribunals have made “remarkable” progress in dealing with remote hearings during the coronavirus crisis, but there are concerns about the behaviour of parties, the senior judiciary has said.’
Litigation Futures, 15th April 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘As the success of remote hearings sparks discussion – with many lawyers advocating for further adoption of these options post-coronavirus – retaining an even-handed view is key. Considering what stands to be lost as well as gained, and what steps can be taken to safeguard human connection and nuance, will be crucial.’
Litigation Futures, 14th April 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘There is no question that remote hearings are a good means of ensuring the continued delivery of the decision-making element of the family justice system. It is amazing that we can do it at all and it is great that we can. But doing so in this way is at the cost of our ability properly to connect to one another, and judges like me are compromised in their ability to conduct hearings with the empathy, fairness, understanding and compassion that is rightly valued as an essential element of the Family Court. I appreciate that in order to deliver justice in the time of Covid-19 we must accept compromise. I wanted to share my experiences however, as there have been times that the extent to which I have felt constrained has been uncomfortable, and I worry about the impact on the parties, and the wider goal of delivering justice fairly. Even though huge progress has and will continue to be made in improving remote hearings, we will be working under the effects of Covid-19 for many months yet to come. I am concerned about the responsibility that will continue to fall on judges for deciding what cases are to be heard or not, and for setting the terms of reference for what constitutes a fair hearing in the time of Covid-19.’
Transparency Project, 7th April 2020
Source: www.transparencyproject.org.uk
‘A project has gone live enabling the global justice community to share experiences of developing remote alternatives to physical court hearings in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic, spearheaded by Professor Richard Susskind.’
Legal Futures, 30th March 2020
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘On Tuesday 17 March 2020, less than 24 hours after the Prime Minister’s announcement to the nation to avoid all non-essential contact due to COVID-19, I attended the first entirely remote hearing for the Court of Protection. I was there in a voluntary, non-official capacity to support someone I’ll call “Sarah”, whose father was at the centre of a serious medical treatment case.’
Transparency Project, 29th March 2020
Source: www.transparencyproject.org.uk
‘A new practice direction clarifying when civil courts may derogate from the principle of open justice to conduct hearings remotely in private has been published today.’
Litigation Futures, 25th March 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘No hearings in the Court of Protection which require people to attend are to take place unless there is a genuine urgency and it is not possible to conduct a remote hearing, the Court’s Vice-President has said.’
Local Government Lawyer, 24th March 2020
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘Judges have rejected radical Ministry of Justice plans to hold full trials via remote video hearings and warned that imposing deep cuts on staff numbers will render the courts system “unworkable”.
The Guardian, 20th December 2018
Source: www.theguardian.com
© Inner Temple Library 2024