HHJ Wood has published the following detailed guidance for civil court users -
Dear local practitioner and other court users,
Covid
19 arrangements and temporary measures at Liverpool and Chester County Court
and other courts in the Cheshire and Merseyside cluster for CIVIL WORK
There have been several requests for some standard
guidance in relation to the conduct of court business over the forthcoming
weeks in the light of the present public health crisis, and in particular the
advice that is given at national level that we should avoid unnecessary travel
or personal contact (“social distancing”), and bearing in mind that many
vulnerable individuals will be self-isolating to avoid exposure to the virus.
If we continue to insist on face-to-face hearings this will exclude a
significant portion of court users.
It has not been possible to provide any clear guidance
before now because of the ever-changing picture, and the advice which is being
received from the senior judiciary and HMCTS. Leadership judges have been keen
to ensure a consistency of approach, insofar as that is possible, but as you
will appreciate different courts have different resources and there is no “one
size fits all”. Further, as you will appreciate our guidance and arrangements
put in place are likely to evolve in coming days.
I and my colleagues, in drawing up these arrangements,
have taken into account the fact that many of our court users are litigants in
person, and will not have access to the same technology available to lawyers,
and it is important that not only is fairness assured, but also that accessibility
to the court is not restricted. The starting point, in accordance with national
guidance, is that all our hearings, other than urgent cases and one or two
exceptional categories, will be conducted remotely, by such means as are
available as soon as possible. Currently that is by telephone through BT
conferencing controlled by the BT manager, or the judge (BT meetme), or by
video, through Skype and Microsoft Teams. Unfortunately, there is insufficient
capacity in the court to use the installed video link widely, and this must be
reserved for the most urgent of cases. Currently the technical barriers
restricting external Skype conferencing are being investigated and hopefully
will be resolved.
Accordingly, the following procedures will apply
immediately for ongoing court work. (Because of the difficulties of sending out
notices there will probably remain some conventional lists in the week
commencing 23rd March, but it should be expected that these
practices will be followed for all weeks thereafter until further notice).
1. Small
claims track hearings.
All small claims track lists will be vacated
until after 4th May, and orders will be sent out accordingly. It is
considered that it would not be practicable to have these matters, in most of
which the parties are unrepresented, proceed by telephone or remotely. Because
of the way these cases are listed, there is likely to be significant personal
contact between individuals and court staff, which is not justified in the
circumstances. New dates will be sent out in due course.
2.
Fast track and multitrack trials and other open court face to face
hearings such as injunctions and committals
The default position for all fast track and multi-track cases will be
that they shall be vacated for a minimum period of four weeks from 25th
March 2020. The position will
be reviewed for the period thereafter. It is considered that insufficient
safeguards can be introduced for the majority of trial work to ensure social
distancing and negligible contact with staff and other court users. As it is
the default position, it will be clear from orders vacating, (a judicial order
subject to CPR 3.3 (5) ) that parties can apply for a variation and the
reinstating of the trial. However it is only in the most exceptional cases
that any such order will be varied and it will be incumbent on the parties to
demonstrate that safety can be assured and social distancing preserved and that
continuation of the trial is consensual between all parties and advocates.
Trials
listed within a window up to 1st June will be vacated and parties
will be notified of the new trial window in due course. Any payment of the
hearing fee will also be deferred to a later date.
Committals
(including arrest cases for ASBI and gang breaches) and injunctions will remain
listed in court but may be subject to vacating after assessment by a judge.
3. Appeals
Oral renewals will be heard from 30th
March remotely. Litigants in person will be given a number to dial into, in the
absence of any representative, but if a party is legally represented it is
expected that the responsibility will lie with the lawyer to set up as usual.
Arrangements are being put in place to have full appeals proceed remotely in
straightforward cases, although it is likely that more complicated heavy
documented appeals will be stood out.
4. CCMCs
and Chambers lists
This will cover interim applications,
pre-trial reviews, applications to set aside etc, as well as costs and case
management. All cases will now proceed by remote hearing. Parties are
encouraged to cooperate in the mode of hearing (usually telephone) and the
usual arrangements for telephone hearings will apply, with one party being
directed to organise (see guidance attached at appendix 1). It should be borne
in mind that litigants in person are not to be excluded from the telephone
hearing process, and lawyers are encouraged to ensure that unrepresented
parties are aware of the process involved and can properly participate. If both
parties are unrepresented, they will be contacted by the court with a number to
dial into. There is active consideration being given to a new telephone system
for hearings from BT which can be controlled by the judge, and full details
will be supplied when this is up and running (BT Meetme).
5. Stage
3 hearings and disposals (back-to-back lists)
It is proposed that these should now
proceed by a remote method, preferably by Skype. There is to be liaison with
local practitioners as to the processes involved, including the filing of the
necessary documents to enable consideration by the judge, but the intention
will be that where cases are block-listed they can be assigned to a particular
judge (say 4 or 5 cases per hour) and counsel can still enter the video-conference
as and when it is necessary to consider a particular case. This will still
enable counsel to attend on other Skype conferences, in a virtual courtroom, in
much the same way as happens now in actual courtrooms. These procedures will
require the cooperation of practitioners to work efficiently. Current technical
difficulties are being ironed out.
6. PCOL,
mortgage and possession cases (both private and social)
Whilst some housing work will
continue (e.g. urgent ASBI injunctions, committals etc) in accordance with
national guidance the default position will be that all possession claims and
evictions will be vacated and postponed for at least three months. The current
working date is 19th June, although this may change.
7. Oral
examinations, attachment of earnings and third party debt orders
Oral examinations will be vacated. It
is clearly inappropriate for members of staff and members of the public to be
in such close association. Fresh dates will be provided after 19th
June. Consideration is being given to moving attachments of earnings hearings
and third party debt order hearings to a remote method, but this has not yet
been finalised. For the time being, parties should assume that these cases will
continue as before.
8. Insolvency
and BPC work
It is intended that separate guidance
will be issued in relation to the BPC (mainly Chancery and TCC) work which is
conducted in Liverpool, in line with national and regional guidance for these
cases, which is likely to involve a substantial amount of remote hearing.
Please consult that guidance when available. In relation to corporate and
personal insolvency, consideration is being given to finding alternative
methods of dealing with these cases, but for the time being please assume that
they will continue as face-to-face hearings until notified to the contrary.
9. Infant
Approvals
In the short-term infant
approval hearings are being dealt with as telephone hearings. Parties should be
aware of the need to ensure the judge has sight of the birth certificate and
the CFO form by filing them at
court 3 days prior to the hearing. However, over coming weeks in
Liverpool at least I propose to adopt the new Birkenhead practice of having
these hearings proceed as “paper hearings” to minimise the strain on the
telephone capacity. Please see the attached guidance at Appendix II for the
practice to be followed once adopted.
10. Other
matters
I am conscious that this is not a
comprehensive list of all matters which proceed in the Liverpool and Chester civil
courts at present and that there are various species of case, the method of
hearing of which has yet to be resolved, and which will depend upon a number of
circumstances. Both I and other senior judges are happy to receive
representations about the best method of proceeding in the current climate.
After all, we are all on a learning curve. Please send any suggestions my Diary Manager, Alison Blunsden, at alison.blunsden@justice.gov.uk;
·
Please note in relation to the above
arrangements, that orders will be sent out by the court where the listing is to
be varied, or where a case is to be vacated. In all instances the order
should include the right of the parties to apply pursuant to CPR 3.3 (5) for a
variation of that order. Exceptionally it might be considered that either a
telephone hearing is inappropriate, or that a case otherwise due for a
face-to-face hearing should not be vacated. Formal applications for a
variation with the payment of fee are unnecessary, but any request should be
put in writing, with full and cogent reasons given as to why an exceptional
course should be taken. This request will be referred to a judge, who may
consider a brief telephone hearing if it is considered to be valid.
·
These arrangements are being put in
place in the Liverpool and Chester civil courts.
I have liaised with the district judiciary in Birkenhead, St Helens and Crewe
and it should be expected that similar arrangements will be followed in those
courts. However, because each court centre has different resources and
priorities, you should consult the individual court to determine their practice
over the coming weeks and not assume that it will precisely coincide with the
Liverpool arrangements.
I also set out in the
separate sheet attached at Appendix I, guidance for the practice to be followed
for those cases which are now converted to remote hearings (i.e. not
face-to-face). This applies principally
to the cases described at paragraph 4. Separate guidance will be provided in
relation to stage 3 and disposals when it has been agreed with practitioners.
Kind regards
Graham Wood
His Honour Judge Graham Wood
QC
Designated Civil Judge
for Cheshire and Merseyside
21st March 2020
Appendix 1
The Guidance
1.
This
guidance applies to all interim applications, costs and case management
conferences and pre-trial reviews listed to be heard on or after Monday 30th
March 2020 in the County Court at Liverpool and Chester or in the District
Registry of the Queen’s Bench Division in Liverpool. It does not apply to the
Business and Property Courts.
2.
All
hearings covered by this guidance shall be conducted by telephone, skype,
BTMeetMe or some other mutually convenient method. In each case arrangements
for the remote hearing shall (unless otherwise agreed in writing between the
parties) be made by the Claimant or, if the Claimant is a litigant in person
the first named represented party
a.
An
agreed focussed reading list of documents for the Judge who will conduct the
hearing together with an agreed estimate of the time it will take the Judge to
read the documents.
b.
attached
to the email as separate attachments each document referred to in the reading
list or where appropriate relevant extracts from such documents. The total
length of the attachments when printed shall not exceed 50 pages and the total size of the email
and its attachments must be less than or equal to 10mb.
4.
The
parties should prepare the focussed reading list and attachments on the basis
that the Judge may have no previous knowledge of the case and may not have
access to the court file.
6.
To help the court you must file your electronic
Court documents correctly. The subject field of any email sent to the court
must include the following:
a.
Case number
b.
Party names (abbreviated where appropriate)
c.
The date and time of any hearing to which the
email relates
d.
Subject matter title
eg E43YJ345 Smith v Jones hearing 23 March
2020 @ 2pm – list of documents
Appendix 2
BIRKENHEAD INFANT
APPROVALS
Due to the ongoing Public Health crisis concerning Covid-19,
there is a need to reduce attendance at Court to a minimum whilst, in so far as
is possible, enabling matters to be dealt with.
The arrangements for Infant Approval hearings in Birkenhead
are being varied with effect from 26 March 2020. The arrangements will last, in
the first instance, until 1 June 2020. This is to enable the hearing to proceed
remotely. For the avoidance of doubt, these steps are to be considered “a
hearing” for the purpose of costs.
The Claimant’s solicitor will need to file at Court,
electronically, the following documents:
1. The
medical report;
2. The
Claimant’s Litigation Friend’s witness statement;
3. Confirmation
from the Defendant as to the final offer and the position on costs;
4. A
certified copy of the Birth Certificate; and
5. IN A SEPARATE PDF, a signed copy of the
C320
The judge will then, insofar as is possible, approve the
award and complete the relevant paperwork without attendance of the parties.
There should also be details included within the e-mail of a
representative of the Claimant who can be contacted at the time of the hearing
as is necessary.
In any case where the award cannot be approved, further
listing directions will be given.
This memo is being distributed to the Claimants’ Legal
Representatives in all up-coming lists. It is their responsibility to forward
this memo to a representative of the Defendant.
Of course, should either party have representations at the
hearing, they are free to do so but they will need to be made in writing.
