Proposals to ditch the High Court and county courts in favour of a single civil court have been broadly welcomed by litigation solicitors.

Launching a consultation paper last week, civil law minister David Lammy said the government recognised that arguments for rationalising the High Court, the county courts and the Family Proceedings Court had been 'gathering momentum for many years'.


Proponents of unification have argued that such a move would be the next logical step after the Woolf reforms, claiming that the current system - with its many different types and levels of court - is inflexible and overly complicated.


Phillips: favours single court

Unification of the civil court jurisdictions has already been backed by the Master of the Rolls, Lord Phillips, and the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Woolf (see [2004] Gazette, 1 July, 1).

The Department for Constitutional Affairs has put forward three broad alternatives: to do nothing and retain the status quo; to use primary legislative reform to create a single civil court by abolishing the county courts; or to use existing secondary powers to simplify and streamline the current system.


Mr Lammy said the consultation was the first phase of a study to identify the potential costs and benefits of unification. But he warned: 'Before we consider proposing any reforms, we have to be sure that they would lead to real benefits, and that the resources required for implementation could not be better employed elsewhere.'


Practitioners welcomed the consultation. Graham Huntley, president of the London Solicitors Litigation Association (LSLA) and commercial litigation partner at City firm Lovells, said: 'We can see the likelihood of there being a single civil court and have no objection in principle provided one of the strengths of the current system, specialist judges for specialist actions, is maintained.'



He added: 'The principal benefit would be a single right of audience, and if cost savings lead to money being put back into the civil system we are in favour of that - there is a pressing need for investment in IT in the civil courts.'


Law Society President Edward Nally said: 'A single court would bring significant improvements to the justice system and make the court process much easier for the public to understand and navigate. The concentration of judicial, IT and court resources should lead to substantial savings.'


He added that having one set of court rules would reduce training costs for lawyers and the amount of time spent ensuring case work meets differing court requirements.


The DCA said it is not at present committed to reform of any kind but if unification were considered feasible, further detailed consideration and a full assessment of the implications on resources would be undertaken.


See Editorial