Business and Property Courts: remote hearings to remain, for now…
For business disputes, it looks likely that remote hearings will be an option into the future.
The civil justice system embraced remote hearings during the Covid-19 pandemic because it had to. There has been speculation as to whether courts would continue to work remotely, post-Covid.
The Business and Property Courts are now leading the way with confirmation that until further notice, all hearings under half a day will be held remotely, unless there is a particular reason why an in-person hearing is required.
For hearings longer than half a day, parties will be asked to express their reasoned preferences and the Judge will decide on the mode of hearing based on the parties’ preferences and the interests of justice. Judges will have the full range of options at their discretion, including hybrid hearings ranging from fully remote hearings to there being some participants in court and some joining remotely.
While this new guidance will remain in place until further notice, so could be reversed, it looks like the Business and Property Courts are embracing remote ways of working to drive efficiency, subject to the overriding principle of the interests of justice. In time, we expect that other courts will follow suit and that remote or hybrid hearings will become the norm within the civil justice system.
For business disputes, it looks likely that remote hearings will be an option into the future.
Related expertise
You may be interested in...
Legal Update
Alternative dispute resolution: The future of ADR in the UK legal system
Opinion
Settling future claims: Insights from Clifford v IBM 2024
Opinion - Maternity services
New online system streamlines maternity services at The University Hospitals of Derby and Burton NHS Foundation Trust
Legal Update - Building Safety Act
Case update: Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Homes and Communities v Grey GR Limited Partnership
Legal Update
Commercial contracts: Top tips before signing on the dotted line
On-Demand - Shared Insights
Duty of Candour review: Submission to the Department of Health and Social Care
Published Article
English Commercial Court rules against Russian exclusive jurisdiction clauses
Legal Update
Changes to the fixed recoverable costs regime
Opinion
R (Willmott) v Eastbourne Council: High Court rules council can deny social housing to disabled ex-tenant over anti-social behaviour
Legal Update
Churchill v Merthyr Tydfil Council: A game changing decision for local authorities
Legal Update
Restrictive covenants – look before you leap!
Legal Update
Court of Appeal decision again demonstrates the need for reform of the Solicitors Minimum Terms
Press Release
Landmark Supreme Court decision clarifies the extent of Doctors’ Duty of Care
Legal Update
Proposed amendments to the Arbitration Act 1996
Legal Update
The downfall of Vesttoo: Fraudulent letters of credit
Legal Update
Are amendments to be expected for the Arbitration Act 1996?
Legal Update
The commercial realities of disputes and litigation
Legal Update
The Supreme Court considers limitation in environmental nuisance claims
Opinion
Vicarious liability of amateur sports teams for player on player injuries
Legal Update
Part 36 combined offers – when are they beaten?
Press Release
Browne Jacobson’s patent litigation team praised for being “dynamic” and a “major player” in IAM Patent 1000 guide
Legal Update
Employment alternative dispute resolution
Legal Update
Insolvency practitioners and trustee immunity
Guide
How to manage retail sector supply contracts and avoid disputes
Press Release
Browne Jacobson grows inheritance and trust dispute practice with partner hire
Legal Update
Subsidy control lessons to be learnt from Bulb
Legal Update
Vicarious liability – don’t overlook the importance of close connection
Opinion
Practical points from High Court ruling that Tesco has infringed Lidl’s IP rights in its famous yellow circle logo
Published Article
O Shaped mindset when working with witnesses
Opinion
Mediation – remote or in person?
Opinion
Confirmation of Acas early conciliation in the context of multiple claim forms
Published Article
ClientEarth claim may expand scope of directors' duties
Legal Update
Embargoed judgments: A professional word of caution
Press Release
Browne Jacobson’s intellectual property lawyers ranked experts in World Trademark Review guide 2023
Legal Update - Public matters newsletter
Public matters - January 2023
Opinion
Civil court litigation 2023: Reforms on the horizon
Legal Update
Settlement agreements – what are the limitations?
Settlement agreements are commonplace in an employment context and are ordinarily used to provide the parties to the agreement with certainty following the conclusion of an employment relationship.
Legal Update
Five “takeaways” in claims against mortgage brokers following Taylor v Legal & General Partnership Services Ltd [2022] EWHC 2475 (Ch)
Claims arising from interest-only mortgages have been farmed in volume. Many such claims to date have sought to drive a narrative that interest-only mortgages are an inherently toxic product and brokers were negligent simply for suggesting them. Taylor is a helpful recalibration, focussing instead on what the monies raised by the mortgage product were being used for and whether the client understood the inherent risks.
Opinion
The Future of Mediation
Legal Update
Trigger happy when directors’ duties are the target?
In a judgment handed down yesterday the Supreme Court has affirmed that a so called “creditor duty” exists for directors such that in some circumstances company directors are required to act in accordance with, or to consider the interests of creditors. Those circumstances potentially arise when a company is insolvent or where there is a “probability” of an insolvency. We explore below the “trigger” for such a test to apply and its implications.