The Woolf reforms, with their enthusiasm for harnessing technology to reform the civil procedure rules (CPR), were designed to bring in a new era of streamlined civil justice.
IT – whether computerised court records and file transfer, or consultation by video links – was to deliver faster case management and reduce the high cost of litigation which, in Lord Woolf's words, "goes against all principles of proportionality and access to justice".
To many commentators, these fundamental reforms have yet to achieve their desired impact because the technology has still to be fully deployed. There are even whispers and published remarks that the court
system does not share the inquiry's belief and determination in IT to reshape CPR.
The Lord Chancellor's Department has been
investigating general IT infrastructure needs for court transcripts; there is growing, yet limited, use of computers for court transcripts and the use of audio-conferencing for pre-case consultations.
The whole issue is dogged by the question of when necessary central funding will be made available to ease the added procedural burden that the reforms have brought. But this is not the whole picture. In the case of tele- or audio-conferencing, the 'lack of an IT infrastructure' argument can be turned on its head.
Instead of looking for investment in conferencing and hardware, the courts system could develop an easy-to-use and time-efficient consultation system by exploiting the advances in telephone networks. This is available via the existing UK telephone network and does not require investment in cumbersome equipment and staff training.
The prospect of a conference call has long been met with dread, scepticism or amusement. Who hasn't been brought into a conference call only to be left on hold and forgotten? Who hasn't huddled round the speaker or receiver to share vital information without feeling uncomfortable or self-conscious? The 'do-it-yourself' approach to tele-conferencing, carried out on the office's telephone system, has led to some unfortunate experiences for many in the legal profession. But inspired by the Woolf reforms, which recommend that courts and solicitors should use conference calls when appropriate, a new breed of tele-conference providers is transforming the picture. Sophisticated conferencing companies with staff fully trained in legal consultation procedures – and who operate out of dedicated call centres – can provide an entire audio-conference infrastructure and management system. All this can be accessed for the price of a phone call.
The teams handle all aspects of the tele-conference. Operators dial up all the parties, the presiding judge last. Once the conference has been initiated, parties carry out their consultation without interruption. As well as being easy to use, the service is 'managed' by the call centre – the pressure of handling the technology is taken off the court staff and the parties. The tele-conference is scheduled in advance and the parties are contacted well before time. If necessary, the call can be digitally recorded and an audio play-back or a data transcription of it is available.
Such conference platforms are already widely used in commercial litigation, driven by the increasing globalisation of litigation. While a direct comparison may not be appropriate, many of the international legal concerns regard tele-conferencing – and increasingly video-conferencing – as essential to their operations. The time-management and cost benefits are clear. The recording of conferences and consultations is a fallback.
Audio-conferencing is only one small part of the Woolf reforms that IT has to address. But the conferencing capability allows courts, solicitors and barristers to opt in to state-of-the-art tele-conferencing without having to invest in hardware.
Michelle Randall is marketing director at Genesys Conferencing.