The Gazette 1995

GAZETTE

E W S

MARCH 1995

Law Society Issues Response to Circuit

Court Review Working Group

The following is the text of the Law

Society response to the review of the

Circuits:

1. The proposal adopted by the

Circuit Courts Review Working

Group emanates from a Group

which did not include a

representative from either branch

of the legal profession. As the

representative organisation of 80%

of that profession, the Law Society

regards it as regrettable that its

views were not canvassed in

advance of the production of the

proposal which it was only recently

asked to consider. Input from

barristers and, in particular,

solicitors at an earlier stage in the

process would, in the Society's

view, have had the dual benefit of:-

(a) eliciting the views of those who

have regular involvement with

the Circuit Courts at local level

and, consequently, experience

of deficiencies in the existing

system; and

(b) producing proposals which

would seek to achieve some

consensus on possible solutions

to the difficulties being

encountered at Circuit Court

level.

2. It has recently been intimated to

the Society that, in addition to an

intention to reduce costs, increase

efficiency and minimise the

number of venues, the primary

consideration of the Working

Group was to achieve "the

reduction to manageable

proportions of the ever-

lengthening delays in all Circuit

Court lists".

3. It is common cause that the

current delays in the Circuit Court

are unacceptable. However, the

Society believes that the proposal

under consideration does not

present an effective solution to the

problem. At the present time,

there are eight Circuits, serving

approximately 56 venues. The

Working Group proposes to

increase the number of Circuits

from 8 to 10, but to reduce the

number of venues drastically,

from the existing 56 to 31. (In so

doing, the Group appears to have

omitted some venues from their

review, e.g. Tipperary, Thurles,

Bantry, Manorhamilton,

Castleblayney.)

The proposal is stated to be based

on "the statistical figures for the

year 1993, the geographical

locations of the various counties"

and on a formula which seeks to

identify the average time required

for criminal trials, pleas and

sentences. The time calculated as

required for criminal matters is

then deducted from an average

156 days per annum of Circuit

Court time in each revised Circuit

Court area, with the balance being

allocated to civil matters and

family law.

5. It is unclear how this exercise

proves the case that the Circuits

and venues should be altered in the

manner proposed. There is no

indication of how the existing

delays will be eliminated by

reducing the number of venues

and, indeed, it would appear to

involve a mere consolidation of

the problem in fewer locations. No

assessment appears to have been

made of whether, for example, the

hypothetical 116 days of Circuit

;

Court time in Circuit No. 2 is

sufficient to deal with 2,457 Civil

Bills and 125 family law matters.

Similarly, we are unaware of any

analysis which would indicate that

120 days provides sufficient time

to deal with 2,372 Civil Bills and

123 family law matters in Circuit

No. 3.

The Society would submit that a

geographical analysis, resulting in

a reshuffle of Circuit Court areas

and a reduction in venues, fails to

address the fundamental problem

underlying the delays in the

Circuit Courts. In the Society's

view, the problems at Circuit

Court level related almost

exclusively to the huge increase in

the volume of work which the

Circuit Court has had to deal with.

This increase arises principally as

a result of work assigned to the

Circuit Court which was

previously dealt with by other

Courts, in addition to work arising

as a result of the introduction of

legislation and changes in the

times in which we live. Amongst

the areas of increased work now

dealt with by the Circuit Court are

the following:-

(a) Family Law

(b) Civil claims up to £30,000 (i.e. the

vast majority of all personal injury

litigation)

PLV is less than £200 (i.e. the vast

majority of land-related disputes)

(d) Planning matters

(e) Competition Law matters

7. Both Planning and Competition

Law provide examples of areas of

work now within the province of

the Circuit Court which have

developed only in recent years.

The increased level of crime and

criminal prosecutions has also

increased the workload of the

Circuit Court.

Notwithstanding the fact that a

number of Circuit judges sit for

very long hours in an attempt to

stem the tide, backlogs are

increasing. Due to the absence of

immediate accessibility to justice,

the Courts are perceived as

ineffectual and the public's

• respect for the administration of

justice is lessened. The proposal

under consideration, by