| 147. |
It is in cases where
the litigant must take a step in the proceedings by filing documents or participating in a
hearing that his unrepresented status matters. Taking the available evidence as to the
incidence of unrepresented litigants at such points in a case, the following picture
emerges :- |
|
|
| 147.1 |
Table 17
in Appendix C shows that at the first interlocutory hearing (where one takes place) the
incidence of unrepresented litigants is still extremely high, between 44% and 64% of all
HCAs involved at least one party in person. The figures are particularly high in
Constitutional and Administrative List cases. |
|
|
| 147.2 |
If summary judgment is
sought - an application which certainly matters to the defendant - a higher level
of representation generally appears. In HCAs, which are, for practical purposes, where one
finds all such applications, between 30% and 39% of cases involve unrepresented litigants.
(Appendix C, Table 18) |
|
|
| 147.3 |
At the summons for
directions stage, ignoring the year 2000 as many cases commenced in that year will not yet
have made their way to that stage, (Note 111) about a quarter of all HCAs involve at least one litigant
in person. (Appendix C, Table 19) |
|
|
| 147.4 |
The percentage of
unrepresented litigants rises at the commencement of trial stage, with about 40% to 50% of
HCAs involving at least one litigant in person. Although the numbers are small and may not
justify extrapolation, a large percentage of Commercial List cases also appears to involve
unrepresented litigants. The same applies to the Administrative Law list. (Appendix C, Table
20) |
|
|
| 147.5 |
The overall picture of
cases involving litigants in person at various stages of the proceedings in HCA cases is
set out in Table 21 of Appendix C. The percentage is substantial, varying
between a quarter and two-thirds of such cases. |
