× Search rightsnet
Search options

Where

Benefit

Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction

From

to

Forum Home  →  Discussion  →  Decision making and appeals  →  Thread

No basis for conducting justice face-to-face in physical premises

shawn mach
Administrator

rightsnet.org.uk

Send message

Total Posts: 3773

Joined: 14 April 2010

From the Law Society Gazette:

No basis for face-to-face justice, says digital court guru Susskind

No basis exists in jurisprudence or legal philosophy for conducting justice face-to-face in physical premises, one of the architects of the online court told a conference yesterday.

Professor Richard Susskind, IT adviser to the Lord Chief Justice, was defending the online courts programme against what he described as six principal criticisms. Earlier, he had told the Court Excellence and Innovation conference in Dubai that the future of civil justice lies in ‘asynchronous’ courts in which judges rule on evidence supplied digitally. ‘Online is not an alternative to the courts system, it is the courts system. Within 10 years most cases will be resolved by online courts,’ Susskind said.

More (including some interesting below the line comments): https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/practice/no-basis-for-face-to-face-justicesays-digital-court-guru-susskind/5068230.article

[ Edited: 9 Nov 2018 at 09:10 am by shawn mach ]
John Birks
forum member

Welfare Rights and Debt Advice - Stockport Council

Send message

Total Posts: 1064

Joined: 16 June 2010

You mean there’s another way other than a gathering of the village elders to hear both sides of a conflict and adjudicate according to legal precedent? Shocked…

ClairemHodgson
forum member

Solicitor, SC Law, Harrow

Send message

Total Posts: 1221

Joined: 13 April 2016

no doubt he’d take a different view if it was he himself involved in a case

and we know the judges take a different view - when it comes to e.g. who is telling the truth, seeing AND hearing the person give oral evidence is best

nevip
forum member

Welfare rights adviser - Sefton Council, Liverpool

Send message

Total Posts: 3135

Joined: 16 June 2010

Many years ago I came across a story about a US defence attorney, defending a black man, who deliberately sat his client at the back of the court and had an entirely innocent man sit beside him at the front of the court.  In that particular State at the time there was no legal requirement that the defendant sit at the front of the court.

When an eye witness was giving evidence on the stand he asked him to point to the man he allegedly witnessed at the scene of the crime.  The witness, without hesitation, pointed to the man sitting at the front of the court.

Game over.

Elliot Kent
forum member

Shelter

Send message

Total Posts: 3117

Joined: 14 July 2014

Richard Susskind on Twitter seems to be suggesting that he might have been misunderstood to some extent
https://twitter.com/richardsusskind/status/1060542278408814594
https://twitter.com/richardsusskind/status/1060544219125858304

I think the negative reaction from lawyers is entirely understandable. Anyone who has ever been to court will tell you how important the face to face interaction can be. Whilst telephone and online hearings might have some value in some circumstances (e.g. as a reasonable adjustment or where parties are out of the country), I really think in-person hearings are necessary to the vast majority of important disputes.

I’m sure everyone here can think of cases which would have been lost on the papers but which were won because the claimant went along to the hearing and was believed by the Tribunal…

shawn mach
Administrator

rightsnet.org.uk

Send message

Total Posts: 3773

Joined: 14 April 2010

The end has been a long time coming:

- The Future of Law (Oxford University Press, 1996; revised paperback, 1998)
- Transforming the Law (Oxford University Press, 2000; revised paperback, 2003)
- The End of Lawyers? (Oxford University Press, 2008; revised paperback, 2010)
- Tomorrow’s Lawyers: An Introduction to Your Future (Oxford University Press, paperback 2013)
- The Future of the Professions: How Technology Will Transform the Work of Human Experts (Oxford University Press, 2015)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Susskind

John Birks
forum member

Welfare Rights and Debt Advice - Stockport Council

Send message

Total Posts: 1064

Joined: 16 June 2010

My understanding is (or was) that F2F would still exist but not as the sole solution (as it is today) but case management with a finale to sort out any issues that are unresolved up to that point? 

Still….

The robot apocalypse isn’t all bad news: A new study suggests artificial intelligence makes better lawyers than humans do.

LawGeex pitted 20 experienced attorneys against a three-year-old algorithm trained to evaluate contracts. Spoiler alert: the computer won.

“Few would be surprised that artificial intelligence works faster than lawyers on certain non-core legal tasks,” according to the report. “However, lawyers and the public generally believe that machines cannot match human intellect for accuracy in daily fundamental legal work.”

https://www.geek.com/tech/ai-beats-human-lawyers-at-their-own-game-1732154/