What will closing courts mean for litigants?

The government’s consultation paper on the operation of courts and tribunals, which was published on 16 July 2015, makes a case for closing 91 courts throughout England and Wales. So, what does this mean for the man in the street?

Well, courts have always been regarded with some suspicion and a degree of fear. Clients frequently say, ‘We won’t have to go to court, will we?’ But if issues are to be tried, and evidence given and cross-examined, they will have to attend.

Many of those attending the courts will not be represented. The costs involved in litigation have never been cheap and the prospect of being a litigant in person, while daunting, is in many cases unavoidable. With the recent legal aid cuts, many litigants are simply out of scope or ineligible for assistance. They will have to make the lonely trudge to court and do the best they can, albeit without any legal knowledge and probably having very little insight into the issues involved in their case.

With the prospect of savage cuts to the number of courts, people will have the added burden of having to make a long journey to actually find the court. While the consultation document says that everyone will be within an hour’s car ride of a court, this rather begs the question of how many people faced with a rent arrears action even own a car
at all.

Local courts also have an advantage as a district judge who sits locally will have a much better overview of how things actually operate in a local authority. He will be known to the advocates, and there will be a better chance, not only of access to justice, but of justice being done. Farming all cases out to large, factory-type operations is likely to make access to justice far more difficult to achieve.

As to the rather flippant idea of having hearings in town halls or even hotels, well, the mind boggles. Once again, the old ideas of abolishing courts altogether in favour of some magical internet solution are hinted at, this despite the fact that everyone knows such ideas rarely work.

This consultation paper is a sad and empty piece of work. It promises to reduce access to justice and to make courts faraway places that are difficult to access. Doing away with the courts is a foolish and ill-thought-out process, and one which we should all resist. Everyone who cares about justice should respond to the consultation paper. SJ

Russell Conway is senior partner at Oliver Fisher