The family courts themselves are also struggling to cope with the increasing number
of litigants in person.
Not so the government, which has serious intentions to double it to # 10,000, thereby provoking a significant increase in the
number of litigants in person.
More than 60 percent of the judges said the number
of litigants without representation increased following the economic downturn.
We have learned that judges can write more effectively, and be more responsive to the
needs of litigants in the delivery of reasons for judgment.
The complexity of the family justice system has a direct impact on the
ability of litigants to proceed without counsel.
Secondly, the
classes of litigants are effectively limited to the company itself (to whom the duty is owed) and shareholders pursuing a derivative action.
But this time around, the challenge has come from a very different
set of litigants.
The former condition is not necessarily met by a fixed liability of # 5,000 because even this sum may be beyond the
means of some litigants.
If you think that they should have a preferred opinion when a court decides a case, what other
categories of litigants should have a preferred position in our courts?
Ten years on it is time to assess his achievements from the point of view of the intended beneficiaries, the litigants,
most of them litigants in person.
It is not the duty of the judge to make
fun of the litigants, and the cause of the rule of law is not advanced by doing so.
The experts also took a dim
view of litigants in person, whose numbers are widely expected to soar as the impact of legal aid cuts and other funding shortages is felt.
From the
perspective of the litigants, even when a judge makes a really bad decision, at least we know there are processes in place to challenge the unfavorable rulings.
The courts
demand of litigants, that we speak respectfully to the courts etc, yet, the courts do not feel they have to do the same.
Many of these litigants would like the assistance of an attorney for parts of their cases even if they can not afford full representation.
Whether a constructive dismissal has occurred is judged on an objective standard, not simply the beliefs or
intentions of the litigants.
When you are charged with the responsibility of deciding cases that affect the lives and
fortunes of the litigants and many others, you inevitably feel the weight of those decisions.
Our goal is to contribute to the conversation on how family court processes can adequately and appropriately meet the
needs of all litigants.
In an environment where a substantial proportion
of litigants do not or can not retain lawyers to represent them, access to justice demands that the court modify its Rules to eliminate the image of lawyers as gatekeepers of the courts.
Let us urgently commission a proper survey and make an evidence - based decision on whether budgets are worth persisting with for the
benefit of litigants.
«The purpose of Justice Bridge is to match the 85
percent of litigants appearing in court every day without lawyers with the recent law school graduates who don't have clients,» said program founder Deborah Ramirez, a professor at Northeastern University School of Law.
Current instructions also include those on
behalf of a litigant whose solicitor failed to bring material documents to the attention of the Court of Appeal resulting in the overturning of a significant judgment in his favour in the court below.
Aside from the rising general need for expert witnesses in complex litigation, I think it helps that Teece advocates a position a particular
type of litigant really likes to hear.
The Wisconsin high court's four - justice majority seems intent on making it easier for big money to influence the judiciary, at the
expense of litigants without resources to contribute to political campaigns.
«This risk is not confined to family law, but family law has a high
proportion of litigants who are self - represented and only want to retain a lawyer to do X, but not Y and Z.»
The Family Justice & Mental Health Social Lab is a landmark collaborative project that explores how we might improve the
experience of litigants with mental health challenges in the family justice system.
Sequestration may also afford an unfair advantage to litigants whose counsel and experts are willing to engage in gamesmanship, at the expense
of litigants whose counsel and experts play strictly by the rules.»
In a 2014 survey of 167 judges and family law lawyers conducted by the Canadian Research Institute for Law and the Family and two prominent academics, all Alberta respondents said that special challenges always or usually arise because of unrepresented litigants» unfamiliarity with the rules of court and the law of evidence, and 96.9 percent said that challenges always or usually arise
because of litigants» unfamiliarity with court processes.