I welcome the Minister to the House and I thank you, Sir, for allowing me to raise this important matter on the Adjournment.
This problem relates to the delay from the time the case is set down, particularly in relation to the Circuit Court, to the time the case is actually heard, thus causing injustice to those seeking legal redress. While they may not always win the case, at least they deserve that it be heard at an earlier stage.
There have been delays in various ends of the legal system. Previously, they occurred regularly in the High Court, but the jurisdiction has changed with regard to the Circuit Court. There are lengthy delays in dealing with cases, particularly personal injury cases — involving claims between £5,000 and £30,000. In 1991 if one set down a case it took four to five months to be heard in the Circuit Court; now the delay is upward to 20 months, and growing. This must be looked at.
This is not a problem of the Minister's making, it has been caused by circumstance, but steps must be taken to address it. Some of the points regarding the courts system and the huge upsurge in litigation causing long court delays were addressed by Mr. Justice O'Flaherty of the Supreme Court. He raised some relevant points in an interesting address to a conference of the National Union of Journalists in Dingle some weeks ago. In an article which appeared in The Sunday Press of 12 February 1995 he stated:
It seems to me that trials are taking too long. When I was first called to the Bar the idea of a case going on for two or three weeks was a rare occurrence, now cases lasting that length of time seem to be very regular.
I agree with Mr. Justice O'Flaherty in that we have become more litigatious and we are going to court more quickly than was the case in the past. That said, the problems must be addressed.
We must also address the situation regarding the Circuit Courts which hear various types of cases. Leaving aside personal injury cases, and where people suffering loss and damage deserve to be compensated, I ask the Minister to give special attention to family law cases and the delays involving these cases. Where there are difficulties there should be an interim hearing before the case is finally dealt with.
Many problems have arisen because of the change in jurisdiction. This has meant that many cases which hitherto would have been heard in the High Court are now heard in the Circuit Court. There has not been an appropriate response to this. The problem is especially difficult in Dublin, although my colleagues in the country tell me the situation is the same there.
There are problems in some of the other courts too. There are probably fewer delays in the District Court, although some of the facilities and overcrowding in these courts should be looked at. For example, from my knowledge of some of the District Courts in the Dublin area, if the fire officer was vigilant on certain days, no court would sit. On one occasion a certain District Justice was competing with a rodent species with regard to who was occupying the court.
Many matters must be addressed, and I am sure that the Minister is well aware of the various problems which must be looked at. In this respect, the legal profession must also respond and various matters must be considered with regard to the timing of cases and procedures. For example, we are all aware of the difficulties in having surgeons, engineers or other expert witnesses appear in court, especially as much of their evidence could be agreed before a court case proceeds. In some cases certain matters could be sorted out and reports agreed much more quickly.
However, there is no doubt that, at present, there are insufficient judges to deal with some of these cases and we must do something to reduce the backlog. It had improved when these problems were addressed earlier, but unfortunately, since 1991, the matter has become four to five times worse. I hope the Minister will respond positively, will take these concerns on board, and with her colleagues, will recognise the present difficulties.
In the same newspaper article, Mr. Justice O'Flaherty stated with regard to family law cases:
The trouble about long litigation is that others are being deprived of access to the courts. And the areas of neglect tend to be those of the needy and the oppressed: family law, problems of housing, questions concerning children and the elderly, who are often the victims of neglect and abuse.
....
We can develop the most high sounding principles in the world but if the courts are not readily available — both in time and cost — to the ordinary man and woman, we are failing in one of our basic duties.
I am sure the Minister would not dispute or disagree with anything I have said this evening. It is a case of considering the situation and discussing it with the people involved — barristers, solicitors, members of the Judiciary, court registrars, clerks, etc. An attempt should be made to bring forward better proposals.
I ask the Minister to respond positively to my remarks. There is great concern about the build up of cases. It can give rise to people in the legal profession, and elsewhere, attempting to settle cases out of court, a course of action which is recognised by insurance companies from a cost view point. I am not speaking of people who bring fraudulent claims. People who have suffered genuine injury or loss and have endured hardship deserve to be compensated.
There must be a response from the legal authorities with regard to sorting out the difficulties which have evolved. The report on the Attorney General's office indicated that that office, and many others, operated in a Dickensian manner. There must be a response to this situation and change must take place. I ask the Minister to recognise the need for reform and to endeavour to eliminate the backlog.
