Regional administrative courts attract only 8% of cases

Bull-ring.jpg
Thursday 05 November 2009 by Catherine Baksi

The new regional administrative courts have attracted only 8% of new cases since they opened six months ago, figures seen by the Gazette have revealed.

In April 2009, the administrative courts began to sit in four regional venues – Birmingham, Cardiff, Leeds and Manchester – to increase access to justice and take the strain off London.

Since then, 729 cases have commenced in the regional courts, 8.4% of all new cases nationally. Of the cases begun since April, 2.5% have been in Birmingham, 2% in Leeds, 3% in Manchester and 0.8% in Cardiff.

David Greene, president of the London Solicitors Litigation Association, said the regional courts had done little to help London: ‘It’s still a very busy court with significant delays in the process.’

But Greene said it was early days and work in the regions would increase as people got used to the new system. ‘People are used to coming to London, and the main chambers doing administrative law are here. It will take time for culture and tastes to change,’ he said.

Greene welcomed the new courts and maintained: ‘It’s sensible that justice should be accessible, and important that these courts are available outside London.’

James Haddleton, vice-president of Leeds Law Society, said that if the figures for immigration reconsiderations, which can only be done in London, are taken out, then 13.8% of new cases began in the regional courts. He noted that Leeds had exceeded its initial target.

Fran Eccles-Bech, executive director of Manchester Law Society, said the new court had hit its target in Manchester and been a success. ‘The purpose of the regionalisation of the court, which is access to justice, has been met and for the first time there are clients sitting in court behind their legal representatives,’ she said.

An HMCS spokesman said initial progress was encouraging.

Comments

regional administrative courts

I used my local Administrative Court for a piece of Crown Office work this year. On the plus side, when we got to listing the case it was efficient and effective. The hearing took place within 3 months of issue, which is very good.
On the negative side, the staff were clearly lacking in training, and this was obvious from day one. When I attended the office for personal issue, having cleared the way on the telephone that morning, the (very young) man on the desk tried to suggest I issue in London. The same mistakes as to the case title and type of action were repeated throughout the life of the case. The final written order was a comedy of errors. Even when I redrafted it (with the Court Officer's consent) they failed to amend typos which had been specifically drawn to their attention. There were also errors in the transcript of judgment which remain uncorrected after publication, which is frustrating as the case has now been reported on Bailii and elsewhere.

Thank you very much for this

Thank you very much for this comment. If anyone else has had a similar experience of the new courts, please do get in touch to let us know.