The Court System Adopted in England and Wales - Essay Example

The potential benefit of the Court System adopted in England and Wales is that the laid procedures offer quicker and more effective Court process, the system also ensures consistency in the decision making process, the system also supports the creation of a Corps of Specialist Advocates, and at parallel it has also reduced the work load. MERITS The establishment of specialist court has brought the judges, especially those having pre-existing specialist knowledge and skills, to conduct the cases within particular field of law. In many of the regions around the world, a specialist judge often will have been a practitioner in the area within which he will adjudicate. This provides the judge with an opportunity to grow his knowledge and expertise on the basis of the experience of hearing similar cases; this has supported his understanding of and familiarity with the subject matter. This procedure has saved out the time required by the previous judges to educate themselves for the variety of cases, the fundamental benefit of Specialist court is that it has reduced the duration of hearings, and reduced the costs for litigants, courts, and administrative staff. The procedure will develop the command and affiliation of a particular judge towards a particular issue and reference, the fact that the specialist judge is familiar with the particular area of law has frequently enabled the court to resolve and reach the conclusion at an early stage, through case management at a directions hearing, to ensure that only the core issues are pursued, and thus the reduction in the number of issues can be expected. (Graeme C. Moodie. The Government of Great Britain. 1961. Crowell. pp.241) CONSISTENT AND REFOMRED DECISION MAKING The strong and comprehensive understanding of the respective judges with the case material has ensured greater consistency in the decision making phase, and the outcome of the proceedings is more predictable. This is especially important in certain fields, such as family law, where the ultimate decision usually requires the exercise of a discretionary judgment. The practice has resulted in the uniformity of decisions and verdicts; the uniformity of the decision is expected to further improve by judges having a collegiate association with each other. The consistency of the decision is required especially in family cases, where the court's decision may well impact forcefully on the parties. If such consistency of the decision is not reflected by the court, it is feared that people and families will develop lack of confidence in the court system, and subsequently the court's authority will dilute. (Edward Cazalet. Specialised courts: Are they a "quick fix" or a long-term improvement in the quality of justice A Case Study. 5th March, 2001) DEVELOPMENT OF CORPS OF SPECIALIST ADVOCATES The Court system of England and Wales, has recommended the establishment of Specialized Court, provided that there is sufficient amount of work, which will be followed by the development of a corps of specialist advocates. The purpose and existence of the court is compulsory, so as to assist and support the running court. Furthermore, the practice of the specialist court will enable the newly appointees of specialized court in identification of the important issues relevant to the case, and thereby give to the parties concerned a more informed prognosis about the outcome of the case. The Court system has further reduced the caseload of generalist courts, which are often overburdened. The specialist court is responsible for relieving the general court in case, a new legislation in particular field require thorough interpretation by the court. The specialist court is also responsible for ensuring that the mainstream of litigation is not impeded. (Philip Norton. The British Polity. 1984. Longman. pp.152) INCREASED MOMENTUM OF LITIGATION The adopted Court system has resulted in the increased momentum of litigation and saved costs. According to reports, the benefits of case management through the family court have been seen both in child and financial disputes, but, regrettably, it has not always proved possible to eradicate the problem of delay, even in child cases. Quite apart from the need to give the parties a proper opportunity to gather evidence and present their cases, the crowded state of the court lists continues to prevent many cases from being heard as soon as they should. Furthermore, the financial case received a lower priority than child cases, and in the resolution of such cases was liable to be the more prevalent. It has been observed that the judges of the Family Division have succeeded in achieving as high a degree of consistency, based on the fact that there is wide scope for the exercise of discretion, uniformity of approach. Extensive law reporting of the decisions of the Family Division in specialist family law reports has also made a major contribution towards ensuring that the judges at all the three tiers of the courts are fully aware of current judicial thinking in the Family Division. (Edward Cazalet. Specialised courts: Are they a "quick fix" or a long-term improvement in the quality of justice A Case Study. 5th March, 2001). DEVELOPMENT OF SUPPORTING SERVICES The establishment of the specialized family court system is responsible for the development of supporting services, and has enabled the families to prefer adjustment on the basis of ground realities and previous records. In earlier days the probation officer would deal with family matters as well as crime; but now we have the court welfare officer, who is a specialist in the family field. Supporting services include professional assessment of family issues and the needs of children and provision of counseling, therapeutic support, emotional adjustment or anger management, training for improving parenting skills, and facilitation and supervision of contact. With the help of trained mediators, it is expected that many disputes will be resolved through consensus rather than through the court hearing. It is generally accepted that consensual resolution of family disputes produces the most durable agreements. Because of its experience and expertise, the family court system and/or its back-up service, is able to direct individuals to the most appropriate of the support and advisory areas available. (Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge (Great Britain), Henry Brougham. Political Philosophy. 1853. Oxford Publications. pp.96) DEMERITS The demerits of the Court system adopted in England and Wales include, loss of generalist over view, coziness, isolation, overlapping with other areas, geographical availability, limited number of cases, and judicial status. LOSS OF GENERALIST PERSPECTIVE The main concern wit reference to the adopted Court system in Wales and England is that the establishment of specialized court is considered loss of generalist perspective. It has been observed that the generalist judges have so far approached the cases without preconceptions. One of the main risks associated with the creation of a specialist court is the loss of a generalist perspective. The generalist judge comes to a case without preconceptions. The judges are found to have little or no familiarity with the advocates or the experts involved in the particular field, and therefore these judges have so far brought in a fresh perspective to the problem at hand. (Barbara P. MacCrea, Ernest E. Rossi. The European Political Dictionary. 1985. Abc-Clio Inc. pp.324) A particular skill introduced by the judges is the reflection of the fact that the judges have applied up their ability to attach appropriate weight to the facts in evidence and to make a judgment on such assessment, however the nature of the case is found to be irrelevant to the incorporated judicial functions. COMFORTABLE AND RELAXED ATTITUDE It has been observed that the judges of established specialized courts have practiced coziness in their judges, and this is much evident by their attitude and approach towards the judicial proceedings. Judges, experts and advocates have therefore turned familiar with the approach of their counterparts, and this has often leaded towards the undue reduction of formality or the use of codes. It is therefore the responsibility of the specialist judges to be careful, and further ensure that litigants in his court or their non-specialist advocates were not treated strange. CONCERNS ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT OF GENERAL LAW The establishment of specialized court has been viewed as risky; it is predicted that the system may lead the particular area of law in a direction away from the development of the general law. The concern can be resolved if the authority successfully ensure that generalist appellate court has the respective authority to sanction any such inappropriate development. It has been observed that there is a consistent overlapping of specialist areas into general fields of law. It is therefore urged that a generalist judge should try the whole case, in place of a specialist judge, who might be tempted to develop inappropriate general principles of law to meet his particular view. (Alexander A. Sergounin, Vinay Kumar Malhotra, Dr.Hari hara das. Theories and Approaches to International Relations. 1984. Anmol Publications Pvt Ltd. pp.174) TRAVELLING The authorities of established specialist courts are involved in long distance travel; this has resulted in inexorably increased cost. It is argued that, if there is an insufficient volume of work to keep a specialist judge busy and justify his exclusivity of jurisdiction, many of the potential advantages of a specialist court will disappear. It is therefore require further preventive measures to ensure that any such view does not reduce the quality of the applicant-Judge who may seek specialist appointment. CONCEPT OF INDEPENDENT DIRECTION The designed and established court system has developed an independent direction. It has been recognized in English law (as in many other legal systems) that a party to litigation who has obtained an expert opinion for the purposes of that litigation is under no duty to disclose such document to the other side. An adverse medical report need not be disclosed to the other party. Nevertheless, in Oxfordshire City Council (1994) 1 FLR 175, the Family Division, in a child case, held that such a document had to be disclosed to the other side since professional privilege had to give way to the best interests of the child. The Court of Appeal upheld the decision, recognizing this particular feature of child litigation. However, the House of Lords held that, in the particular case, it was only by reason of the provisions of the Children Act 1989 that such a document was discoverable, and that the general principle on which the Court of Appeal (and the Family Division) had decided the case was misconceived. In this way the practice of the Family Division was brought into closer conformity with general principle. (Edward Cazalet. Specialised courts: Are they a "quick fix" or a long-term improvement in the quality of justice A case study. 5th March, 2001) It is considered that the major disadvantage of the adopted Court System is that all the judges are settled major part of the country, and therefore the major part of the country has turned centre and focal point of judicial expertise, however the role and influence has been minimized by introduction of circuit system. REFERENCES 1. Philip Norton. The British Polity. 1984. Longman. pp.152. 2. Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge (Great Britain), Henry Brougham. Political Philosophy. 1853. Oxford Publications.pp.96 3. Alexander A. Sergounin, Vinay Kumar Malhotra, Dr.Hari hara das. Theories and Approaches to International Relations. 1984. Anmol Publications Pvt Ltd. pp.174 4. Graeme C. Moodie. The Government of Great Britain. 1961. Crowell. pp.241 5. Barbara P. MacCrea, Ernest E. Rossi. The European Political Dictionary. 1985. Abc-Clio Inc. pp.324 6. Edward Cazalet. Specialised courts: Are they a "quick fix" or a long-term improvement in the quality of justice A case study. 5th March, 2001. Read More