The Gazette 1974

SOCIETY'S REPORT ON COURT ORGANISATION

tort 2

DISTRICT COURT EXCLUDING

DUBLIN AREA

^'location of Districts and of District Justices

Eor the reasons set out previously the Society

are

firmly

the

opinion

that

the

present

ystem of having a Justice assigned to a specific district

toould be continued and that no case has been made

J j c h would justify a change, whether in the District

Urt

or Circuit Court. If work should fall into

ears in any area through the assigned Judge or

Justice finding more work than he can cope with, then

temporary Judge or Justice should be appointed to

eal

with arrears

only.

Paragraph 56 of the Com-

toittee's Report seems to suggest that an alteration in

to present system would result in the ultimate saving

t least three District Justices. While this may be so,

to must weigh the saving gained in the nonappoint-

Jtont of three District Justices, against the additional

t and expense of having witnesses travel longer dis-

Jnces to Courts with the consequent loss in time as

°ve referred to.

Abolition of District Courts

I he reports of various Bar Associations deal with the

tocifi

recommendations in relation to the Courts in

toestion. While it is agreed that in specific areas

totein District Courts could be abolished or the number

sittings reduced, there is also a case in

jtocific areas for an increase in the number of sittings

rtesently held. These comments are based on practical

°wledge of the difficulties and problems in the areas

tototioned.

ng of cases

^ I he recommendation that a Judge or Justice should

a discretion to hear a civil case at any one of the

toduled venues in his district, where it is for the

ater convenience of the parties so to do, is

-to which should be adopted, not only on the

'de, but also on the criminal side,

but only

where

parties involved wish to select a venue which is

jtovenient to the Court and to all parties who are

Y°lved in the particular trial. In practice it is the

;'ew

the Society that the number of instances in

h this arrangement will be of benefit or availed of

te not great.

C o a r

t Sittings

Ehe recommendations in paragraph 65 are supported.

'tonsing Court

* he recommendations in this paragraph are sup-

ted and it is the opinion of the Society subject to the

^tonients of the Dublin Bar Association that these re-

tomendations should be implemented as quickly as

WSsible

as they will certainly result in a substantial

Vln

g i

the present inconvenience and expense in-

ed by the members of the public who are involved.

Vacations

I he recommendations in paragraph 68 are generally

ptable, save it is felt that the existing holiday period

by W. A. OSBORNE (Vice-President)

should be adhered to, namely that the annual close

down during the month of August should be continued.

It is felt however that to suspend the District Court for

a period in excess of one month would be too long

and could create adverse public comment and would

inconvenience the public generally.

Annual leave for Justices/working week

The Society feels that these matters can be dealt with

by the Justices and the Department of Justice.

Recommendations 73 and 74

These recommendations are fully supported.

CIRCUIT COURT—COUNTRY

Paragraph 115 dealing with the Dublin Circuit Court

indicates how some of the arrears in the Dublin Circuit

Court were disposed of, namely by a Judge of a country

Circuit postponing a sitting of his Court and attending

in Dublin. While this particular arrangement helped

to clear the substantial arrears in the Dublin Circuit

Court, it had the effect of leaving arrears in many of

the country Circuits and in some areas it has not yet

been possible to overtake the arrears which arose during

the assigned Judge's absence in Dublin. It is suggested

that this type of, presumably, temporary change to

meet arrears is not one which is either desirable or

assisting the efficiency of the system.

Transport

In recommendation 121 a reduction in the existing

number of venues is indicated as being justified on the

grounds of economy and efficiency taking into account

improved transport facilities and the greater turnover

of a larger sitting and the securing of attendance of

professional witnesses. The Society disagree entirely

with the reasoning contained in this paragraph. The

questions of the availability of public transport, of the

attendance of witnesses professional or otherwise have

been dealt with already.

Larger Sittings

It is suggested that a turnover at a larger sitting

would result in a saving of the time presumably now

lost in conducting shorter sessions at occasional venues.

One must question the nature and extent of the time

saving involved. There may be a saving in time from

the Court's point of view, but any such saving must be

weighed against the loss of time involved in having

witnesses travel longer distances from their homes to

attend Court and must take into account the fact

that the limited number of Court venues will become

exceedingly busy resulting in the inevitable difficulty

of listing cases for hearing on specific days. The problem

of witnesses being obliged to attend at a Court some

considerable distance from their homes, with the resul-

tant expense and the probability of a case not being

reached and that their attendance will be required

again and again, will add to the present frustration of

witnesses. The loss of public time involved and

the financial loss to the witnesses concerned will

far outweigh any loss which may now arise through

a Court having a short session at a convenient occas-

157