The High Court and county courts could be scrapped to make way for a unified civil court under broad proposals backed by the Master of the Rolls (MR) and the Lord Chief Justice.


The MR, Lord Phillips, told the Gazette that changes in the jurisdiction of the civil courts and a marked decrease in the number of actions before them meant that most cases could now be started in either court.



He added: 'If you start a case in the High Court, you won't always get a High Court judge trying it. I think logic drives one to the conclusion that we ought to have a single civil jurisdiction.'


A rationalisation of the judicial divisions could see cases allotted to suitable judges rather than forums.


This could lead to a more fluid judiciary, with more opportunities for district court judges to advance through the hierarchy and comprehensive rights of audience for solicitor-advocates.


In 1998 there were 66 High Court judges in the Queen's Bench division (QBD). By 2002 there were 73, despite the fact that the number of cases had decreased. Judges in the QBD work in the criminal and county courts when they are not working on QBD cases.


The Lord Chief Justice, Lord Woolf, said: 'A unified civil court must be the way forward... Unfortunately, the unification of the civil courts is at a standstill. The fewer the structural barriers within the civil justice system, the better.'


Law Society President Peter Williamson said: 'There is much to be said for replacing the current two-court system with a single, civil jurisdiction. We believe it could improve efficiency, reduce overall costs and improve access to justice by bringing greater clarity to the procedures.'


However, he added: 'Any reform process must preserve the quality of our senior judiciary.'


A spokeswoman for the Department of Constitutional Affairs said: 'We agree that the idea of a single civil jurisdiction is one that is worth exploring further. We would need first to consider whether the potential long-term benefits of simplifying the system would justify the costs associated with making the change.'


Mark Clough QC, chairman of the Solicitors Association of Higher Court Advocates and a partner with City firm Ashurst, said: 'I think the idea is intriguing. I don't think there is any magic in the distinction between the courts. What matters is where the courts are located so that there are sufficient civil courts'.