The Law Society’s new green paper on reforming civil justice

A strong civil justice system turns abstract rights into concrete ways to protect everyone’s freedom, dignity and equality. As such, civil justice is vital to a properly functioning democracy. All too often, our current system fails to live up to this, however. One in twenty people in England and Wales have an unmet legal need involving a dispute, for example, and one in ten people with a contentious legal issue report having had to move or lose their home as a result. Minority groups and those on low incomes bear the brunt of these failures.

Digitisation done right is essential for a modern, efficient system, as this work recognises. But digitisation done badly decreases the chance of rights being vindicated by adding more tunnels and dead ends to an already bewildering maze. Results from previous justice digitisation programmes have been decidedly mixed; through a lack of people-led design, some reforms have simply added stress and delays.

The Law Society’s proposed reforms

It is good, therefore, to see the Law Society join growing calls for practical, big-picture ways to improve this system and make it fit for the future. First, it is brilliant to see proposals informed by direct conversations with the people the justice system is built to serve, asking them what they need from reforms.

Emphasis on the need for an easily accessed, easily understood, trusted service to explain people’s legal rights, responsibilities and options is spot on. JUSTICE has long called for joined up work to ensure we all understand our rights and the legal avenues open to us. 

Such is the complexity of the current system that even searching for the correct entry point can discourage people. Our work on housing disputes, for example, echoes the paper’s concerns around a fractured legal landscape, with tenants struggling to navigate a bewildering array of schemes, ombudsmen and tribunals.

It is, therefore, very welcome to see the Law Society adding their weight to emerging consensus on the need for a trusted ‘one stop shop’ entry point for people needing legal advice. JUSTICE has previously called for an integrated service providing accessible legal information, advice and assistance. A similar call for an initial ‘online triage process’ was echoed by Lord Justice Briggs’ review of the civil courts in 2016.

Since JUSTICE is also currently researching the opportunities and risks of using artificial intelligence (AI) in the justice system, I await the project’s future work on AI and big data with particular interest. 

Challenging areas