The Gazette 1978

GAZETTE

MAY 1978

perform the radical task of producing a blue print for the

organisation of the administration of justice, in this

country, for decades to come.

Most of us who have to deal with the system of court

administration can point to particular matters which

could be improved on, but individually, none of us are

competent to produce an overall plan, for coping with

difficulties. In my view, and I stress that I am speaking

personally, much of the difficulty arises from the fact that

we get the system of administration of justice which we

pay for. The Committee on Court Practice and

Procedure, in their 17th report, drew attention to the fact,

that for the fiscal year ended 31st March, 1972, the

estimate for public services for the courts was just over

£1,000,000. The estimate for the current year is £3.4

million pounds. This must be contrasted with the fact that

the total budgeted estimate of expenditure is £2.1 billion

pounds of this, the vote for the Department of Social

Welfare is £309 million, Health, £357 million and

Education, £350 million.

There are four particular areas, in which it is clear, that

additional resources would be required in order to effect

any significant improvement in the operation of the court

system. First, I quote from the 12th Interim Report of the

Committee:

"Paragraph 160—Courthouses.

The position as to the provision and maintenance of

courthouse accommodation is far from satisfactory.

This causes us concern, in so much as we consider,

that it is almost impossible to uphold respect for the

law in some of the dilapidated courthouses at

present in use."

The minority report of Mr. Micks and Mr. Justice

McMahon, put the matter in stronger terms:

"On this topic we agree with the recommendations of

the report and we dissent from our colleagues, only

in their choice of language in describing the position

as to the provision and maintenance of courthouse

accommodation as 'far from satisfactory'. The

condition of many courthouses is scandalous and

not merely impairs the proper administration of

justice, but also makes it difficult for the ordinary

layman to have any respect for legal process."

While there have been improvements in particular areas, I

doubt if there is any practitioner here today, who could

not identify several courthouses that come fairly within

the description of the minority report to which I have

referred.

Increase In Judges

Secondly, an increase in the number of judges. The

same report to which I have referred recommended an

increase in the number of Circuit Court Judges, and

indeed, since the report was published, both the number

of Circuit Judges and the number of High Court Judges

has increased. In the latter case, to a point were, for the

time being at any rate, there are more judges than there

are courts in which they can sit. It is clear that in the

formulation of any new broadly based policy, the number

of judges required would have to be reconsidered, par-

ticurly, in line with any recommended increases in

jurisdiction in the lower courts.

Registrars and Court Staff

The next matter which requires radical re-appraisal is

the provision of Registrars and other staff to service the

court system. I would refer you to the speech made by the

President of the High Court, The Honourable Mr. Justice

Finlay, at the inaugural meeting of the Solicitors' Appren-

tices Debating Society in January, 1978, the text of which

is published in the Society's g a z e t t e, and which many of

you, I am sure, will have read with considerable interest. I

strongly support the criticism and concern expressed by

the President on that occasion, and I would urge the

Minister to take due account of that concern, when con-

sidering the matters to which he requires the recon-

stituted Committee on Court Practice and Procedure to

address themselves. Fourthly, it would be tedious to give

examples of the way in which court procedures might be

modernised. Every practising lawyer can produce these

from his own experience, but 1 will take two in particular.

It seems to me, quite illogical that a wife or a husband

seeking a judicial separation and also seeking relief under

the Guardianship of Infants Act, and the Family Home

Protection Act, should have to institute two separate sets

of proceedings in the High Court, one of which must be

instituted by way of petition, a procedure, with which

most practitioners are unfamili ar and the originating

document in which it is couched is language reminiscent

of the middle ages. Likewise, in non contentious matters,

it should surely be possible to mark judgement in the High

Court and obtain an execution order without having to

file a multiplicity of differnt forms, again couched in terms

which only classical scholars are equipped to interpret. I

want it to be clearly understood that these criticisms are

not directed either at the hard-working officers, whose

duty it is to administer the present system nor at the

practitioners who deal with them. Clearly, it is necessary

for someone to stand back and look at the system

critically, with a view to recommending radical reforms,

which with the help of modern technology will, at the one

time both bring the system up-to-date and allow it to

operate efficiently without involving enormous extra cost.

So far as the Society is concerned, I think I can fairly

say, that we will endeavour to provide any assistance,

within our power, towards achieving the radical reforms

which I think are very necessary, always bearing in mind,

that we are a voluntary organisation, dependent on the

generous giving of their time and energy by our members.

We have no vested interest that I can identify in maintain-

ing the present system and indeed on the contrary, since

the public generally deals with the system through us, we

tend, sometimes unfairly, to be blamed for the

inadequacies of the system, over which we have little or

no control.

I would urge the Minister to consider these matters

comprehensively, and to ensure that whatever body is

entrusted with the task of reform will be adequately

equipped in terms of research staff to perform their

functions, and also that the Minister and the Government

would commit themselves politically, to the imple-

mentation of the recommended reforms, with the

assurance that the resources necessary will be allocated.

Legislation

Recent years have witnessed enactment of a consider-

able volume of legislation, some of it quite controversial. I

have no doubt that as the present Government's

proposals are developed within the civil service, there will

be a further volume of legislation. In these circum-

stances, it is essential that our Society, being concerned

with the affairs of the practitioners and of the public,

should concern itself with a detailed examination of