Mr. Ken Murphy:

In fairness to the committee, one has to differentiate between the civil and common law jurisdictions. True comparatives are probably to be found between the Irish system and other common law jurisdictions. The inquisitorial civil law system is much more judge-heavy, because the role played by the judge is much more proactive than it is in the common law system. The point was made that the burden on the parties is much greater in our system. I do not know if those figures were complied before the increase in the number of judges in the Court of Appeal, which we welcome. I remember then Chief Justice, Mrs. Justice Susan Denham, constantly referring to statistics, which I do not have to hand. She had statistics on the ratio of judges per head of population in Ireland compared to civil law and common law jurisdictions all over the world and it seemed to be very low. I often say the judge is in many respects the cheapest part of the whole system. Courthouses, staffing, infrastructure and technology could well be more expensive, and I think it is a false economy on behalf of the State not to appoint more judges, because there are economic consequences to delays in the justice system affecting "Ireland Inc." - the econony - quite apart from individual citizens and their entitlement to speedy access to justice. I have never fully understood the rationale of the State in underfunding judicial appointment levels, except possibly that creating more appointments would require more courtrooms and more infrastructure. We need that anyway.

Certainly, in the context of the joint Bar Council of Ireland and Law Society initiative, which has full Government backing, seeking to attract international legal business to Ireland, we cannot continue to operate with delays in our court system and expect to compete in this contested space internationally with other jurisdictions looking for a Brexit dividend as well. We have to invest in this, and that means more judges.