Kicking and screaming

Lord Justice Briggs' Chancery Modernisation Review, published last December, included more than 100 recommendations to improve the practice and procedure of the Chancery Division.

It recognised the challenges presented by 'downward pressure on resources' and an 'almost complete lack of modern or effective IT'. Briggs LJ identified as a major objective "that modern IT should be provided... to the specifications set out in the Jackson Report, including ... electronic filing and an electronic system for the drawing and sealing of orders".

E-filing

On 8 September 2014, the Chief Chancery Master issued practice notes on electronic filing (e-filing) and case management (e-working), and master's orders. These start the process of implementation which will enable the Chancery Division to adapt to a new e-filing and e-working system, currently expected to be operational in the Rolls Building by late 2015.

The Chancery Division in London started using the new electronic court file (CE-File) on 1 October 2014. Claims issued after that date will, as far as possible, be managed from the e-file. The e-file will only contain documents the court is required to hold under the CPR, ie a limited number of statements of case and applications.

The court will no longer maintain a paper file. All documents sent to the court will be destroyed after six months, leaving only those held electronically accessible to the court. The six-month period is to allow for scanning errors to be identified.

Whether this reduces the number of letters written to the court remains to be seen, but those letters will no longer be on the court file. Exhibits lodged with any application will also be limited in size (for example, 30 pages for Part 7 claims) unless the court orders otherwise.

It is likely the court will simply not accept a larger exhibit, rather than partially scanning an exhibit as some have suggested. Some are concerned this will result in highly selective exhibits, including extracts rather than full documents. This may become a rule that is observed in the breach unless it is obviously being abused. The practice note makes clear that correspondence should only be exhibited if there is a real need.

No bundle, no hearing

The CE-Files contain such limited documents that a hearing bundle will be required for every hearing from 1 October 2014. Responsibility for lodging the bundle falls on the applicant or whoever the court directs. Oversize exhibits can be incorporated into the hearing bundle, although excessive exhibits may still be penalised.

If the bundle is not lodged, the hearing will be adjourned, probably on the terms that the party at fault pays the costs. A strict 'no bundle, no hearing' policy is to be adopted.

Masters' orders

Many Chancery Division users in London have experienced delays in obtaining sealed orders. While this is not a problem exclusive to the Chancery Division, the second practice note addresses the issue.

Essentially, responsibility for production and service of orders has passed to parties. The applicant, claimant or the party directed by the court must provide a draft order which neutrally expresses what the master ordered. There is specific guidance about consent orders and the need to lodge clean copies of the order, failing which it will be rejected. If the new procedure is followed, the order should be sealed within days.

By following the practice notes, you may improve yours and your client's experience of the court process (and in the short term, at least while others catch up, gain some advantage). Failure to do so could result in adverse costs orders and delays - which would be difficult to explain to a client. SJ

Francesca Kaye is the immediate past president of the LSLA and a partner at Russell-Cooke

Copyright & permissions