If these reforms are reliant upon HMCTS then this talking shop will come to nothing!
These are the idiots that send people like the elusive Luke Altmann on junkets to Serbia and Canada to preach to the natives about ‘open justice’ when his own department can’t even answer the phone 🤪
Did you know there is a live case right now whereby the government solicitor is actually arguing against the principal of open justice?! 🤯
This is all over the rights to view the controversial granting of electricity warrant of entry. THESE are the issues that should be highlighted!
All of this attention to the rarefied atmosphere of the upper courts neglects to address the real concern where 90% of court cases are heard for normal people which is in magistrates court …
The magistrates’ courts operate as a captured government rubber stamping exercise because they avoid accountability by insuring that defendants are unable to prove what went on in court because amazingly any attempt to record in the lower courts is criminalised. People are routinely arrested and thrown into jail on the mere suspicion that they may have had the temerity to record the words of a judge or magistrate. Such a banana Republic court regime in modern society deserves nothing but the contempt of the people that their courts are run in such a despicable manner. Virtue signalling in the upper courts will do nothing to address the systemic failure of the corrupted lower courts which affect most normal people.
So what is the definition of ‘the media’ now then ?
Is it the same corrupt BBC government shills ?
The incoming Trump government has stated they will recognise the rights of social media influences and other journalist to attend White House briefings which recognises the fact that “ we are the news now “
When I can produce content that reaches a quarter of 1 million people then I think I can rightly claim my place at the media table and if they reform full short in this respect then they can expect some robust pushback…👊🏻
Though now non practising I do still maintain a close and increasingly concerned interest, where I am therefore led very much to agree with my friend James Turner. There is more: there are still so many in positions of authority such as in the judiciary who cling to the very British (or do I mean just “English”?) conditioned reflex of secretiveness, thereby as they see it retaining the power residing in the withholding of information from a public prima facie entitled to know. And what of the leaky Court roofs and the requirement of taking sensitive, vital instructions and imparting initially unwelcome advice in noisy, echoing Court corridors? That I experienced far too often in West Midlands venues it would be invidious to name, before I had ceased to practise in circa 2017.
So, it’s down, unsurprisingly, to the availability of resources. Actual litigants in the county courts might well ask, with the steady deterioration in the service provided by those courts, where additional funding and staffing should be allocated. The county courts now have a national call Centre: my staff (I’m a solicitor) tell me that, until they gave up bothering, the average waiting time to get through was between an hour and an hour and a half (although the court service say it’s now down to only 25 to 30 minutes)and then the call was probably a waste of time because the person at the other end knew nothing about the case beyond what they could read on a computer screen. A simple email to a county court about a current case elicits a reply referring to the hope of a substantive response within 40 working days. Some courts take between four and six weeks to issue proceedings sent to them by post.
So if and when those new resources arrive, how should they be allocated? To improving a shambolic service or to facilitating open access to it?
“In some areas”? Typical lawyers’ hot air. In what area is the ability of the judiciary to deliver ANY justice (open or otherwise) not dependent on proper governmental resourcing?
I got a warm feeling when I read that Denning “verily” believed!
True, Joshua, and it was good to begin a new year with a little nostalgia. I wish you every blessing in 2025.
Thank you!
All of us verily believed 70 years ago.
If these reforms are reliant upon HMCTS then this talking shop will come to nothing!
These are the idiots that send people like the elusive Luke Altmann on junkets to Serbia and Canada to preach to the natives about ‘open justice’ when his own department can’t even answer the phone 🤪
Did you know there is a live case right now whereby the government solicitor is actually arguing against the principal of open justice?! 🤯
This is all over the rights to view the controversial granting of electricity warrant of entry. THESE are the issues that should be highlighted!
All of this attention to the rarefied atmosphere of the upper courts neglects to address the real concern where 90% of court cases are heard for normal people which is in magistrates court …
The magistrates’ courts operate as a captured government rubber stamping exercise because they avoid accountability by insuring that defendants are unable to prove what went on in court because amazingly any attempt to record in the lower courts is criminalised. People are routinely arrested and thrown into jail on the mere suspicion that they may have had the temerity to record the words of a judge or magistrate. Such a banana Republic court regime in modern society deserves nothing but the contempt of the people that their courts are run in such a despicable manner. Virtue signalling in the upper courts will do nothing to address the systemic failure of the corrupted lower courts which affect most normal people.
So what is the definition of ‘the media’ now then ?
Is it the same corrupt BBC government shills ?
The incoming Trump government has stated they will recognise the rights of social media influences and other journalist to attend White House briefings which recognises the fact that “ we are the news now “
When I can produce content that reaches a quarter of 1 million people then I think I can rightly claim my place at the media table and if they reform full short in this respect then they can expect some robust pushback…👊🏻
Though now non practising I do still maintain a close and increasingly concerned interest, where I am therefore led very much to agree with my friend James Turner. There is more: there are still so many in positions of authority such as in the judiciary who cling to the very British (or do I mean just “English”?) conditioned reflex of secretiveness, thereby as they see it retaining the power residing in the withholding of information from a public prima facie entitled to know. And what of the leaky Court roofs and the requirement of taking sensitive, vital instructions and imparting initially unwelcome advice in noisy, echoing Court corridors? That I experienced far too often in West Midlands venues it would be invidious to name, before I had ceased to practise in circa 2017.
So, it’s down, unsurprisingly, to the availability of resources. Actual litigants in the county courts might well ask, with the steady deterioration in the service provided by those courts, where additional funding and staffing should be allocated. The county courts now have a national call Centre: my staff (I’m a solicitor) tell me that, until they gave up bothering, the average waiting time to get through was between an hour and an hour and a half (although the court service say it’s now down to only 25 to 30 minutes)and then the call was probably a waste of time because the person at the other end knew nothing about the case beyond what they could read on a computer screen. A simple email to a county court about a current case elicits a reply referring to the hope of a substantive response within 40 working days. Some courts take between four and six weeks to issue proceedings sent to them by post.
So if and when those new resources arrive, how should they be allocated? To improving a shambolic service or to facilitating open access to it?
Thank you for drawing attention to this. I had no idea it was this bad.
“In some areas”? Typical lawyers’ hot air. In what area is the ability of the judiciary to deliver ANY justice (open or otherwise) not dependent on proper governmental resourcing?