 |  |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|  |
|  |
|
PART II - POSSIBLE REFORMS
H. THE NEED FOR REFORM| 188. | The evidence examined above plainly indicates that the civil justice system in Hong Kong shares with many other systems the common defects identified in the literature. While it would not be accurate to say that the civil justice system here is "in crisis" it may justifiably be said that, in varying degrees, litigation in Hong Kong :- |
| * | Is too expensive, with costs too uncertain and often disproportionately high relative to the value of the claim and to the resources of potential litigants. | |
| * | Is too slow in bringing a case to a conclusion. | |
| * | Operates a system of rules imposing interlocutory obligations that are often disproportionate to the procedural needs of the case and productive of expense and delay. | |
| * | Is too susceptible to obstructionist tactics by the manipulation of interlocutory rules, contributing to and permitting exploitation of substantial waiting-times for interlocutory applications. | |
| * | Is insufficiently case-managed and too adversarial, with the running of cases left in the hands of the parties and their legal advisers rather than the courts, with the rules often ignored and not enforced. | |
| * | Is incomprehensible to many people and does not do enough to facilitate use of the system by litigants in person. | |
| * | Does not do enough to promote equality between litigants who are wealthy and those who are not. | |
| 189. | There is, in the view of the Working Party, plainly a need for reforms designed to remove or reduce these deficiencies and to improve the performance and competitiveness of our civil justice system. Simply doing nothing should not be considered an option. This is a view shared by Mr Andrew Jeffries, a solicitor with Messrs Allen & Overy and a member of the Law Society's Working Party on the Reform of Civil Process. He writes :- |
| "No one seems to doubt that some reform of civil justice is needed. The problems to which commentators point are very familiar. The system of civil justice is seen as being too slow, too expensive and too complicated. The costs of a claim, particularly in the District Court, can often outweigh the amount in dispute. The wealthy litigant can browbeat the poorer litigant into submission through endless applications, posturing or delay. The litigant in person finds the whole system complicated and unnerving. These are exactly the same problems as were identified in England by Lord Woolf in his report and exactly the same problems that have faced other comparable systems of civil justice." (Note 143) |
Note
| 143 | Hong Kong Lawyer, August 2001, p 82. <back> |
|
 |
|
