Close up of computer keyboard

In a Covid world, justice can be served by alternative dispute resolution (ADR) says ACSO executive director Matthew Maxwell Scott

Posted on Mon, 03/08/2020

Consumers making a disputed claim in the civil justice system have long faced the Hobson’s Choice of either dropping their action altogether or waiting many months or even years for their day in court or at a tribunal.

If you believe, as I do, that justice delayed is justice denied, this particular choice is a very unattractive one. Consumers are often seeking redress but also an explanation of what went wrong, and why. Many will suffer additional physical, mental or financial harm while the wait for these answers goes on.

Court and tribunal delays have worsened as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic. While HM Courts & Tribunals Service has done its best to avoid total meltdown, like most of us it was woefully unprepared for the lockdown. Its ongoing attempts to adapt new technology and working practices should be encouraged, albeit with meaningful research on its impact on court users, something the Justice Select Committee has already called for.

When the committee remotely eyeballed Justice Secretary Robert Buckland for a virtual question and answer session on 23 June, it noted that outstanding courts cases stood at over half a million. The prospects for this backlog of cases being dealt with rapidly are very poor.

This unfortunate situation should be a spur to our exploration of ways that alternative dispute resolution (ADR) can be adopted far more widely across the entire justice system. ADR allows cases to be resolved without the need for court. Different models exist and are emerging which make use of both the reserves of expertise out there and of the latest technology.

We know consumers have been far more relaxed about using new tech during the pandemic, whether it be for shopping, work or a whole range of services that might once have been exclusively face to face.

Furthermore, it would be a missed opportunity if policymakers did not make more use of the opportunity provided by so many potential and highly qualified adjudicators and mediators working from home, and therefore able to fit in cases much more easily. They are often the same people who would have ended up hearing the matter in a court or tribunal months later.

The benefits to all parties seem clear. The sooner resolution is reached in cases, the sooner people can get on with their lives. There are significant potential savings on court fees and ADR can help ease the growing burden on the system and ensure a shorter wait and fewer frustrations.

In justice matters it is always welcome to discover any issue that can be treated as (with a nod to Father Ted’s revolting colleague Father Jack) an ecumenical matter between claimants and defendants. Covid can and should be a spur to the accelerated take-up of ADR where it is appropriate and above all where it is in the consumer interest.