|
|
|
|
|
|
| 14.1 |
The CPR contain certain provisions about the use of information technology in the conduct of cases. Apart from these provisions, no standard practice has evolved or been prescribed for the use of information technology in civil cases, but it is possible to identify certain areas in which electronic techniques may be used which should encourage the efficient and economical conduct of litigation.
|
| 14.2 |
It must be remembered, however, that it is unlikely that the number of litigants in person will diminish, and the number may well increase, in the future and that not all solicitors have available sophisticated IT facilities. Use of IT is acceptable only if no party to the case will be unfairly prejudiced and its use will save time or money.
|
| 14.3 |
A number of specific applications of information technology have been well developed in recent years. The use of fax, the provision of skeleton arguments on disk, and daily transcripts on disk (with or without appropriate software) have become commonplace. Short applications may be economically heard by a conference telephone call, provided that the parties ensure that the judge or Master has the relevant documents and a draft order. Taking evidence by video link has become more common, and the available technology has improved considerably. There is still little experience of the intensive use of information technology in the ordinary course of the trial by, for example, providing documents as images to be displayed.
|
| 14.4 |
In any case in which it is proposed to use information technology in the preparation, management and presentation of a case in a manner which is not provided for by the CPR, it may be necessary for directions to be given by the judge who is to hear the case. It is unlikely to be satisfactory for parties and their solicitors to agree to a particular application of information technology (for example, using imaging techniques to deal either with disclosure or with the preparation of documents for use in court, in effect by way of electronic bundles) without the agreement of the judge. Accordingly it is likely, particularly in heavy cases, that it will be desirable for a judge to be nominated to conduct the case. Where a nomination is desired, application should be made to the Chancellor in writing by letter addressed to his clerk for a judge to be nominated.
|
| 14.5 |
In every case in which it is proposed to use information technology, the first step will be for the solicitors for all parties to determine whether it is possible to establish a common protocol for the electronic exchange and management of information. It is recommended that the protocol provided by the Technology and Construction Solicitors' Association ("TeCSA") be used. The TeCSA protocol has enjoyed success and is available from TeCSA's website at http://www.tecsa.org.uk/protocol/protocol.htm. The CPR's underlying policy of co-operation and collaboration is particularly important in this context. In a large case the parties must facilitate the task of the judge by providing any additional help and IT know-how, including, for example, demonstrations, which he or she requires in order to control the case properly.
|
| 14.6 |
The judges of the Chancery Division and their clerks are equipped with IBM compatible computers running Windows (usually NT 4.0 but in some cases another version) and MS Office 97 or 2000. To avoid compatibility problems it is preferable that text files to be provided for use by a judge or clerk be provided in Rich Text Format (RTF).
|
|
|
| 14.7 |
Skeleton arguments, chronologies, witness statements, experts' reports and other documents (if available in electronic form) should be provided on disk (or by e-mail) if the judge requests it. Enquiry should be made of the judge's clerk for this purpose. Where the complexity of the case justifies it, attention must be given to providing the judge with versions of the documents containing links to enable cross-references to be followed up in a convenient manner. Disks provided to judges must be checked for virus contamination and be clean.
|
E-mail communications with the Chancery Division
|
| 14.8 |
A protocol for e-mail communications with the Chancery Division sets out how parties may communicate by e-mail on certain matters, and can be found at www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk. The protocol applies PD 5B on electronic communication and filing of documents in respect of specified documents: skeleton arguments, chronologies, reading lists, lists of issues, lists of authorities (but not the authorities themselves) and lists of dramatis personae sent in advance of a hearing. The protocol sets out the relevant e-mail addresses, which are also to be found in Appendix 1. The clerk to the judge concerned should be contacted to find out whether the judge will accept other documents by e-mail and whether documents should be sent by e-mail direct to the judge's clerk's e-mail address.
|
|
|
| 14.9 |
The various shorthand writers provide a number of different transcript services. These range from an immediately displayed transcript which follows the evidence as it is given (usually with about 10 seconds delay) to provision of transcripts of a day's proceedings one or two days in arrears. The use of transcripts is always of assistance if they can be justified on the ground of cost and in long cases they are a considerable advantage. If an instantaneous service is proposed, inquiries should be made of the judge's clerk, and sufficient time for the installation of the equipment necessary and for any familiarisation on the part of the judge with the system should be found. If special transcript-handling software is to be used by the parties, consideration should be given to making the software available to the judge.
|
| 14.10 |
If the shorthand writers make disks available (and nearly all do) the judge should be provided with disks as they appear if he or she requires them.
|
|
|
| 14.11 |
The use of fax in the service of documents is now authorised by rule 6.2(1) and PD 6.
|
| 14.12 |
Each of the judges sitting in the Chancery Division may be reached by fax if the occasion warrants it. The respective judges' clerks' telephone and fax numbers are set out in Appendix 1. Where the name of the judge is not known, short documents may be sent to the Chancery Judges' Listing Office, whose fax number is also given in Appendix 1. Written evidence should not be sent by fax to this number. All fax messages should have a cover sheet setting out the name of the case, the case number and the judge's name, if known.
|
|
|
| 14.13 |
Applications may be heard by telephone, if the court so orders, but normally only if all parties entitled to be given notice agree, and none of them intends to be present in person. Special provisions apply where the applicant or another party is in person: see paragraph 6.3 of PD 23. Guidance on other aspects of telephone hearings, and in particular how to set them up, is contained in paragraph 6.5 of PD 23. When putting that guidance into practice once an order has been made for a hearing to take place by a telephone conference call, the following points may be useful:
|
| |
|
(1) |
A telephone hearing may be set up by calling the BT Legal Call Centre on 0800 028 4194. The caller's name and EB account number will have to be given. Other telecommunications providers may also be able to offer the same facility.
| |
(2) |
The names and telephone numbers of the participants in the hearing including the judge must be provided.
| |
(3) |
The co-ordinator should be told the date, time and likely approximate duration of the hearing.
| |
(4) |
The name and address of the court and the court case reference should be given, for delivery of the tape of the hearing.
| |
(5) |
Then tell the court that the hearing has been arranged.
| | |
It is necessary to ensure that all participants in the hearing have all documents that it may be necessary for any of them to refer to by the time the hearing begins.
|
|
|
|
| 14.14 |
The court may allow evidence to be taken using video-conferencing facilities: rule 32.3. Experience has shown that normally taking evidence by this means is comparatively straightforward, but its suitability may depend on the particular witness, and the case, and on such matters as the volume and nature of documents which need to be referred to in the course of the evidence.
|
| 14.15 |
A video-link may also be used for an application, or otherwise in the course of any hearing.
|
| 14.16 |
Annex 3 to PD 32 (Video Conferencing Guidance) provides further detail on the manner in which video conferencing facilities are to be used in civil proceedings.
|
| 14.17 |
Video conferencing facilities are available at the Royal Courts of Justice in Court 38. It is convenient that these facilities should be used if at all possible in relation to proceedings which are under way in the Royal Courts of Justice. Attention is drawn to the following matters:
|
| |
|
(1) |
Permission to use video conferencing during a hearing should be obtained as early as possible in the proceedings. If all parties are agreed that the use of video conferencing is appropriate, then a hearing may not be necessary to obtain such permission.
| |
(2) |
Before an order fixing the appointment for the use of the facilities at the Royal Courts of Justice is obtained their availability must be ascertained from the video managers (Roger Little / Norman Muller, tel. 020 7947 7609, fax 020 7947 6357). When the order is made the video managers must be informed immediately so as to ensure that all necessary arrangements can be made well in advance of the hearing.
| |
(3) |
If it is necessary for other facilities to be used, whether because the Royal Courts of Justice facilities are unavailable or for any other reason, consideration should be given to using the facilities available at the Bar Council or the Law Society. The party seeking to use the facilities will be responsible for making all the necessary arrangements.
| |
(4) |
If the use of facilities other than those at the Royal Courts of Justice, the Bar Council or the Law Society is proposed, approval must first be obtained to the use of the particular facilities even if the parties are agreed.
|
|