The Woolf reforms have been generally well received in England and Wales, to the extent that pundits are now wagering that -- now Lord Woolf is Lord Chief Justice -- he might be planning a similar overhaul of the criminal justice system alongside the Auld review.On the international stage, however, civil justice is still high on the agenda and Lord Woolf's reforms are part of a wider appraisal of the system being carried out in many common law countries.

But such was the radical nature of the reforms that they have turned up the heat worldwide.A Lord Chancellor's Department spokesman says: 'There has been considerable interest in the civil justice reforms from a succession of international visitors, both from justice ministries and judges.

The issue frequently comes up for discussion or study when international delegations visit.

These have included visitors from Germany, Japan, India, the US, Kenya and various central European countries.'Conor McDonnell, a litigation partner at leading Irish law firm Arthur Cox, notes: 'Ireland is behind the UK in terms of case management.

We have no tradition of exchanging witness statements and experts' reports within time limits, as they had in the UK even before Woolf.'However, reform is on the cards: the judiciary and the Irish Law Society are trying to finalise a report by the middle of August for the rules committee of the superior courts, according to Mr McDonnell.He says that reform, when it comes, is unlikely to be statutory: 'To introduce case management techniques for commercial cases, for example, parliament wouldn't need to change the law -- reinterpreting the existing rules of the supreme court could achieve this just as easily.'Mr McDonnell confirms that there has been an awareness of the Woolf reforms since a Dublin conference two years ago -- attended by Lord Woolf -- hailed by Irish chief justice Declan Costello as an historic day.'Efficiency is the key behind proposed changes, to ensure that justice is as swift as it should be,' Mr McDonnell explains.

'There is concern that commercial cases are taking too long.

Some cases are taking over 100 days and we are looking to reforms in Ireland to beef up the pre-trial procedure that can cut this down.'Given the close relationship between the UK and Hong Kong, it is little surprise to find out that Woolf has had a major effect there.

Andrew Jeffries is based in City giant Allen & Overy's Hong Kong office and will shortly take over as head of its Asian litigation group.He explains: 'Back in January, the chief justice of Hong Kong announced the setting up of a working party to review civil procedure in the former colony in the light of the Woolf reforms in the UK.

The review is a long-term project and the working party -- which consists of five judges and six others who are lawyers, government officers and lay representatives -- is expected to report back after 18 months.'As in Ireland, there seems to be no desire to introduce new law.

Mr Jeffries says: 'There was a general mood at a big conference held in March to discuss reforms, well-attended by the senior judiciary, that the best way forward was to make better use of the existing procedural rules, rather than engage in the kind of wholesale reform introduced in England.'But will the Chinese have to clear any procedural changes? 'I don't think that the position between Hong Kong and Beijing has any effect, as the changes will probably ultimately take the form of procedural details, not legislative amendments.

The general impression here is that the English reforms involved many changes made for change's sake, and that those types of reforms are not necessary here.

There certainly is not the appetite over here for case management conferences (CMCs) any more than necessary, and mediation is not the big deal here that it is in Europe.'There is a feeling that Hong Kong enjoys an advantage in being able to watch the Woolf reforms bed down before reforming its own system, according to Mr Jeffries: 'By watching the English experience, we are able to see those bits of the reforms that will suit us best.'Janis Meyer, a litigation partner in the New York office of US firm Dewey Ballantine, explains that many of the procedural reforms brought about by Woolf had already taken place in the US by the mid-1990s.

Indeed, in his speech to the American Bar Association last month, Prime Minister Tony Blair acknowledged the US influence in the Woolf reforms.

Thus federal rules were in place by 1995, making provisions for automatic fast-track directions and encouraging CMCs.Ms Meyer recalls a seminar held two years ago at Dewey Ballantine's New York office by two English lawyers pointing out the principal changes of the Woolf reforms: 'I remember thinking that many of these things had been put in place over here in the early 1990s.'If anything, the US system seems to be moving ahead of the UK's.

At the moment, there is some feeling, according to Ms Meyer, that discovery rules are still too onerous.

The Woolf reforms introduced discovery thresholds into England and Wales which were closer to US thresholds.

Now it looks like the US system could make discovery even less onerous, once again leaving the English behind the times.But if the Woolf reforms brought US changes to the UK, and these are now spreading to enclaves such as Hong Kong, what of common law jurisdictions such as Kenya and India, where resources are more limited?In 1998, the chief justice of Kenya gave a speech at a conference named 'Reforming the Justice System of Kenya'.

He said: 'I have instructed a thorough review of civil justice to remove archaic bottlenecks in the civil procedure rules.'Muin Malik is a solicitor with AH Malik & Co in Nairobi.

The most tangible process to occur since the chief justice's speech came in late 1998, when a commercial court was set up in Nairobi, according to Mr Malik.

'The time taken to dispose o f commercial matters has been reduced from an estimated waiting time of five years to about three years,' he says.There is certainly no shortage of interest in the English reforms in Kenya.

According to Mr Malik, a recent visit by the High Court's Master Turner 'greatly impressed our judiciary on the sweeping reforms made in the UK'.He adds: 'Mr Justice Tom Mbaluto, a senior commercial court judge who sits on the rules committee which looks into civil procedure in Kenya, has often made references to the Woolf reforms and the need for such reforms to be made in Kenya.'According to Mr Malik, these views 'are echoed by fellow judges in the commercial law courts and elsewhere'.But some of the worst procedural clangers of the system remain intact.

An example, Mr Malik says, is the service of summons to foreign jurisdictions.

He explains: 'For service to a party outside the Commonwealth, one still needs the approval of the chief justice of Kenya, who then presents the papers to our ministry of foreign affairs for service out of the jurisdiction.'However, the main problems in Kenya remain corruption and the lack of resources, according to Mr Malik, who adds: 'A senior judge of the Court of Appeal, Mr Justice Kwach, produced a report last year which highlighted the unacceptable level of corruption in the judiciary, as well as the legal system's inability to cope with the needs of society.'Despite the bluntness of the report, Mr Malik says 'there has not been any real progress'.Meanwhile in India, procedural rules have been tabled at parliament with the aim of curtailing the number of appeals and cutting down on the amount of adjournments.

The reforms have met with fierce opposition from many of India's 600,000 lawyers.

After lawyers rioted and went on strike earlier this year, the reforms are now on the backburner.But according to Indian and UK-qualified solicitor Kundana Unadkat, who currently works in the company department of City firm Ashurst Morris Crisp, the Indian government is keen to introduce the reforms.

'There are a huge amount of lawyers in India -- about 70% -- who rely on these lengthy adjournments and the associated affidavits and documents for their well-being.'It is not all bad news, Ms Unadkat says.

In the seven years since she began practising in Bombay, Indian debt and bankruptcy courts have become much more efficient.But the average law suit in India takes between ten and 15 years to reach settlement, and Ms Unadkat says that she feels 'quite ashamed' of the self-interest of lawyers trying to preserve the status quo: 'Unless the Indian civil system starts providing speedy and reliable judgments, foreign investors will continue to doubt Indian lawyers' abilities, and draft their contracts to avoid any disputes being heard in India.'