Mr. Darren Lehane:

I thank Deputy Costello for the question. Based on my experience of hearings conducted during the pandemic, I believe I was very fortunate that I participated in several lengthy hearings that were held online, including through the software provided through the Courts Service – the Pexip software. One hearing was held via a private operator whose use the court facilitated. One party paid for it. My comment on this flows from the fact that one party paid for it. It is rather unfair in a system of justice, which is supposed to treat all equally, that certain categories of cases can proceed faster than others based on the ability of parties involved in the litigation to fund a particular platform to the exclusion of other kinds of cases.

On the litigation experience, the Bar always takes it from the point of view not of the members as such but ultimately of the clients whom its members represent. We are very conscious at the Bar that litigation is, in ordinary times, a very stressful experience. A point was made earlier about court infrastructure. We would always want to avoid a system whereby people say that since everything can be done online, there is no need to invest in physical infrastructure. We do not want to have circumstances in which clients are forced to have consultations with their lawyers around corners outside office buildings or court buildings at what are some of the most stressful times in their lives. This applies not only in family law cases but also in others. Therefore, it is important that the facilities be provided.

I do not believe we should lose sight of the fact that, during Covid, notwithstanding the efforts of the Courts Service, Bar Council and Law Society, a lot of litigation ground to a halt and could not proceed. It was possible to deal with urgent matters but many matters that were not classified as urgent by the Courts Service, Judiciary or various professions did not go ahead. They were still urgent to the individual litigants. They have to get their cases heard as quickly as possible. That is my experience of litigation.

On a point that follows from this, on the question of vulnerable witnesses, which we were asked about earlier, the Bar Council is very conscious of the need to take account of the fact that people are vulnerable before they step into a courtroom. Everybody is vulnerable in a courtroom but there are those who are vulnerable before they enter. The Bar Council has always, or at least in recent years, provided training to its members in the form of advanced advocacy courses on how to handle vulnerable witnesses. We are also very conscious of the recommendations made in the O'Malley report.

To sum up, I had a positive experience of online hearings in which I was involved but I am conscious that they were in a particular area of law. The online forum is not suitable in many other areas of law. The recent recalibration of the listing system by the Courts Service shows that with many aspects of the law, there will be a reversion to physical hearings. It is trying to say that justice needs to be seen to be done. People need to be present sometimes to see that it is done when it is impacting on them. I hope that answers the Deputy's questions.