Internet Newsletter for Lawyers
July/August 2006, by Delia Venables

Judicial Use of IT and the Internet
by His Honour Judge Behrens

“With the completion and roll-out of several major IT projects underway, the judiciary is about to enter the cyber-age with a vengeance.”

This is how BENCHMARK, the new electronic judicial business newsletter, introduces an article on Judicial IT. According to the Judicial Website, www.judiciary.gov.uk, there are now more than 42,000 judicial office holders in England and Wales including full and part time judges, tribunal members and magistrates. Leaving aside the tribunal members and magistrates there are some 3,400 members of the judiciary of which 1,220 sit full time.

With such a large number of judges it is obvious that different judges will have different levels of IT skills and different demands on the services that are provided. There are still some judges (I believe relatively few) who steadfastly refuse to use a computer at all; the majority recognise it as an invaluable tool in our day to day life. In those circumstances I cannot hope in this article to cover the full spectrum of judicial use of IT. It is necessarily largely a personal view.

Hardware Resources

All full time members of the judiciary are provided with a laptop computer equipped, inter alia, with Microsoft Office software. Due to the security restrictions imposed by the Government Secure Intranet (gsi) network we have very limited power to alter the settings on our laptops (we cannot even alter the format of the date) and we cannot add our own software. Some judges find this very inconvenient and protest. However most of us have our own computers at home where we can do what we like; for my part the advantages of having a linked laptop greatly outweigh the inconvenience caused by these restrictions.

All large Court centres have docking stations networked to the gsi network. We thus have in our rooms a permanent broadband connection to the internet together with a private e-mail address on the gsi network. In addition, in many Court centres (though not the RCJ) there are docking stations in the Court rooms enabling us to be connected throughout any hearing. Many of the smaller court centres are not yet linked to the gsi network. So far, some 205 sites have this Broadband access. There are currently projects to provide Broadband connections to unlinked Courts.

We are currently provided with a facility enabling dial up access to the network whilst at home. The security filters attached to the gsi network are such that the connection is unacceptably slow. It can be used to pick up and send e-mails (preferably without attachments) but not much else.

For the increasing number of judges who have their own broadband connection to the internet at home there is currently a project to provide them with wireless routers. This is intended to enable them to have a wireless connection to the gsi network at home. There are a number of security issues involved in access to the network with the result that anyone who wishes to take advantage of the facility has to have special software downloaded on to his laptop. There is, what appears to be an unresolved bug in the software which means that whenever the judge wishes to move his laptop from (say) his Chambers to Court the computer needs to be rebooted. This process causes an unacceptable disruption to the Court proceedings. In the result many judges (including myself) have decided not to take advantage of the project until the position has been resolved. Take up of the wireless routers has not been good.

Legal Resources

A vast amount of legal material is made available free to members of the judiciary. Most of it is made available via the internet but some is downloaded directly to our laptops either via the network or by CDROM. I, for example, have the White Book, the Green Book and the All England Law Reports downloaded to my laptop giving me access to them at all times including when I have no network access.

To list all the resources available free to (full time) judges on the internet would take too long in an article of this size. We gain access to most of them at present via the eLIS (electronic Library and Information Services) website. This is the government-funded provision to the judiciary of a very considerable range of legal information otherwise available only through prohibitively expensive commercial subscription (see www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/elis for more on eLIS). From my point of view the most of useful sites are the Law Reports (Justis), Halsbury Laws and Statutes (Butterworths) but I make use of Gore Browne on Company Law, and the Insolvency Law reports from time to time. I try to keep up to date via Lawtel.

In addition to the sites available through eLIS we also have access to unreported decisions via Case Track or (of course) BAILII. If ever I make a decision of any potential interest I endeavour to send a copy to these sources.

Conferencing

In addition to e-mail, judges have enjoyed a judicial conferencing facility via a dial-up networking facility known as Felix. There were a large number of conferences. Some were open, to which anyone could join and contribute including non-judicial members. Most were closed and limited to specific purposes. Thus there were conferences limited to specific circuits and to topics within those circuits. As an example there is a conference specifically designed for High Court Queens Bench Civil Cases that may be heard by a visiting High Court Judge. Each case is summarised – usually by a District Judge after a case management conference – and the summary is then posted in the appropriate conference. The relevant Presiding Judge then posts a message deciding whether the case needs to be tried by a High Court Judge or whether it can be released to a Deputy. A similar conference deals with criminal releases. Other conferences allow important information or decisions to be disseminated fast and allow, for example, District Judges to raise practical problems with their colleagues in the hope that they might be able to provide solutions.

The whole system has proved extremely useful and efficient. It was originally based on a dial-up system but later versions permitted updating via a broadband connection. The software was somewhat basic and undoubtedly had some limitations. Whether those limitations justified the replacement of the entire system is a matter on which views differ and which it is not now profitable to discuss. The decision has been taken that – at considerable expense – a new web based judicial portal will be provided by Cable and Wireless.

Those of us involved in the testing of the new portal can see that it is potentially a sound web based conferencing system and is potentially capable of all the functions now carried out by Felix. Furthermore it will be available to many more people than those who can currently access Felix. It will be accessible from any internet-enabled computer not just the Court laptop.

However there are problems. It is currently running a year late and it is still not clear when roll out will occur. The conference topic in Felix on the Judicial Portal makes it clear that there are still a number of bugs to be fixed. The overwhelming criticism relates to the speed of operation. The time taken for the messages to be displayed is regarded as unacceptably long. Views differ but the more extreme testers suggest that it should not be accepted at all. Access to the portal has recently been withdrawn to testers in the hope that Cable and Wireless can sort out the problems and it will not be restored before the autumn. It may not be restored at all.

The Future

There are a number of other IT changes which affect the judiciary. As already noted there is now a judicial website that aims to increase public understanding of the judiciary. It includes amongst other things, factual information about the different types of judicial office holders and their work. We also receive an electronically produced and delivered judicial business newsletter.

There are a number of other IT projects being piloted or rolled out. Some of these such as XHIBIT and PROGRESS affect listing and the administration of criminal cases in the Crown Courts. Of more interest to me, as a civil specialist judge, is the civil eDiary Project which will replace paper diaries at all civil and family centres, which is currently being rolled out. In the more distant future there is a project for the filing of documents in civil cases to be carried out electronically. If implemented, it will be the first step towards electronic case management, electronic communication between judges and parties and electronic rather than paper based hearings. The project is at an early stage but a formal Project Board has been formed.

As with all publicly funded projects it will need to be justified financially. Indeed concern has been expressed as to whether there will be sufficient public funds to maintain the present IT provision, never mind develop improvements.

His Honour Judge John Behrens is the Specialist Chancery Judge for Leeds and Newcastle-upon-Tyne.

Back to Contents.