‘There is no question that remote hearings are a good means of ensuring the continued delivery of the decision-making element of the family justice system. It is amazing that we can do it at all and it is great that we can. But doing so in this way is at the cost of our ability properly to connect to one another, and judges like me are compromised in their ability to conduct hearings with the empathy, fairness, understanding and compassion that is rightly valued as an essential element of the Family Court. I appreciate that in order to deliver justice in the time of Covid-19 we must accept compromise. I wanted to share my experiences however, as there have been times that the extent to which I have felt constrained has been uncomfortable, and I worry about the impact on the parties, and the wider goal of delivering justice fairly. Even though huge progress has and will continue to be made in improving remote hearings, we will be working under the effects of Covid-19 for many months yet to come. I am concerned about the responsibility that will continue to fall on judges for deciding what cases are to be heard or not, and for setting the terms of reference for what constitutes a fair hearing in the time of Covid-19.’
Full Story
Transparency Project, 7th April 2020
Source: www.transparencyproject.org.uk
