Video hearings should take precedence over audio hearings ‘wherever possible’ when a remote hearing is deemed suitable

HMCTS evaluation of remote hearings during the Covid-19 outbreak also finds that more can be done to widen access to more public users attending hearings remotely

Video hearings should take precedence over audio hearings 'wherever possible' when a remote hearing is deemed suitable, according to new research from HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS).

Further to the swift transition to the widespread use of audio and video technology in courts and tribunals during the Covid-19 outbreak, HMCTS has taken the opportunity to explore the characteristics, experiences and attitudes of public users, legal professionals, the judiciary, support professionals and court and tribunal staff towards remote hearings.

Key findings from the study - that included a survey of almost five thousand public users who took part in remote hearings between May and October 2020, as well as around 2,000 legal representatives and 1,000 members of the judiciary - reveal that -

• the likelihood of attending a hearing remotely was heavily influenced by jurisdiction - while most Crown and magistrates’ court users attended in-person (87 per cent and 91 per cent respectively), for employment and  Social Security and Child Support (SSCS) tribunals the reverse was the case where 78 and 96 per cent respectively attended remotely;
• there were higher rates of litigants in-person among public users attending remote hearings (65 per cent, compared to 34 per cent of those that attended in-person);
• one in five remote hearing public users experienced issues with technology and around half of judicial survey respondents (48 per cent) and a quarter of legal representatives (25 per cent) had needed technical support in some of their remote hearings;
• vulnerable individuals were particularly less likely to have found it easy to communicate with their representative (41 per cent disagreed that it was easy compared with 29 per cent of those not classed as vulnerable);
• where judges had scope to decide whether a hearing was held remotely, the judicial survey indicated that the perceived vulnerability of parties was by far the most important factor in influencing the decision;
• remote hearings were mostly accessed via audio (68 per cent accessed via telephone or BT MeetMe) compared to 32 per cent by video platforms - this varied by jurisdiction and for SSCS tribunals just 3 per cent were conducted by video; and
• public users that attended remote heairngs were more likely to be satisfied with the overall experience than in-person users, with most viewing video hearings as a better option for future use over audio hearings and tribunal users in particular likely to think remote hearings were acceptable (both during and after the pandemic).

Concluding the evaluation, HMCTS highlights that given video users’ views are more positive than audio users’ views overall, where a hearing is deemed suitable for remote participation, video hearings should take precedence over audio hearings in most contexts wherever possible unless there are specific support requests or technical issues.

In addition, considering whether the survey findings show that public users need additional support for remote hearings, HMCTS concludes that -

‘Existing support is working well for most public users who receive it, but more can be done to widen access to more public users attending hearings remotely. Those who received support were more positive about their experience than those who did not receive support.’

On the wider question of what the study reveals about people's perceptions of the fairness of remote hearings, HMCTS highlights that -

‘Across remote and in-person court users, a similar proportion felt they received a fair hearing, had confidence in how the court or tribunal handled their case and agreed their case was given an appropriate amount of care and attention (varying from 60 per cent to 69 per cent across the different measures).'

However, it also warns that -

‘Vulnerable users were more likely to experience challenges in communication with their representative during the hearing. Recommendations … such as ensuring needs are identified and adjustments made ahead of the hearing and ensuring mechanisms are in place for individuals to interact with legal representatives, intermediaries, interpreters during the hearing are important for ensuring a fair hearing.’

For more information, see HMCTS remote hearing evaluation from gov.uk