The General Scheme of the Civil Reform Bill 2025 seeks to bring to life recommended changes to civil litigation procedures in Ireland. The reforms aim to streamline procedures, reduce delays and costs, and improve efficiency across the Irish courts. 

A 2020 Review of the Administration of Civil Justice (known as the 'Kelly Report') identified over 90 recommendations aimed at improving access to justice and procedural efficiency in Ireland. The Minister for Justice has recently published the General Scheme of the Civil Reform Bill 2025 (the 'General Scheme'), which is intended to deliver many of the recommendations proposed in the Kelly Report.  

Key reforms proposed in the General Scheme include:

Production of documents 

Under the General Scheme, traditional discovery processes – often criticised for their breadth and cost – are to be replaced with a more focused document production regime. Parties will be required to produce all documents in their power, possession or control which:

• they intend to rely on at trial;
• are relevant and material to the outcome of the proceedings, including documents that their opponents would be reasonably likely to rely on; and
• are necessary for the administration of justice. 

A claimant must provide these documents to their opponent(s) within 28 days of serving their claim form, while respondents will have 42 days from the date of service of their defence, to provide their respective documents. 

When considering the administration of justice in the context of document production, courts should keep in mind factors such as: 

• the cost of production;
• procedural efficiencies;
• the administrative burden placed on parties;
• proportionality;
• fairness and equality; and
• the relevance and materiality of the documents to the outcome of the case.

Parties will not be allowed to rely at trial on any documents that they have not produced (other than with leave of the court). The General Scheme also recognises the court’s ability to make an order directing the production of documents by non-parties. 

These reforms are aimed at reducing the time and expense associated with discovery, particularly in complex commercial and public law cases. 

Judicial review

Judicial review is a cornerstone of the constitutional system, providing a mechanism by which courts supervise the legality of decisions made by public bodies, namely by providing parties with the ability to formally question the validity of an act of a public body. At the core of the General Scheme is the proposed restructuring of the judicial review process. The current process has been criticised for uncertainty, prolonged timelines, and high costs, particularly in cases involving planning, infrastructure, and regulatory decisions.

The General Scheme proposes to place key elements of judicial review on a clear statutory footing. It outlines the remedies that can be sought by way of application for judicial review and the factors that the court must consider before granting such remedies. Remedies can include orders to quash decisions, to mandate the performance of duties, to prohibit an action from being taken, or to award damages. Declarations that a decision infringed the applicant’s rights or is unconstitutional and/or injunctions restraining the public body from carrying out a decision pending the determination of the matter, can also be sought.  

Under the proposed framework, even where a court finds that a public body acted unlawfully, they must not grant a remedy unless the court is satisfied that:

• the applicant has suffered harm or prejudice;
• any error of law or procedural error was material to the decision;
• the interests of justice require a remedy to be granted; and
• the remedy would provide a significant benefit to the applicant. 

The General Scheme also provides that only a person directly affected by the act in question and who has a sufficient interest in the matter, can make an application for leave to apply for judicial review. This is another significant departure from the current status quo.  

Case conduct principles 

The General Scheme codifies the need for parties to conduct civil proceeding in accordance with case conduct principles. These principles include that matters of law and fact at issue between the parties should be identified, defined, narrowed, prioritised and sequenced at as early a stage as possible. Furthermore, proceedings are to be conducted in a just and expeditious manner, for the purpose of minimising costs. 

The courts are to ensure parties adhere to the case conduct principles and are to promote and engage in active case management practices. To further streamline and fast track proceedings, the courts are to no longer grant adjournments or extensions to stays unless they are satisfied there are sufficient reasons – which are also in the interests of justice – to do so. Mere agreement between parties, will no longer in itself be sufficient to have matters adjourned. Where a court considers that the case conduct principles have not been adhered to, but nonetheless grants an adjournment, the General Scheme provides that the court shall impose a penalty on the party seeking the adjournment. 

Discontinuance of proceedings 

Under the General Scheme, if no steps have been taken in proceedings for six months, a party can serve their opponents with a notice of intention to lodge an application for deemed discontinuance. If no further steps have been taken in the proceedings within 28 days of the notice being issued, the serving party may lodge with the court an application to discontinue the proceedings. The proceedings will be deemed discontinued on the date of lodging a valid application. Upon discontinuance, the court is to issue a notification to all parties confirming the discontinuance. 

Monetary jurisdiction 

In addition, the General Scheme proposes to increase the monetary jurisdiction of the District and Circuit Courts. These changes, reflecting inflation and rising litigation costs, are intended to ensure that cases are heard at the most appropriate level. By enabling more cases to be resolved in lower courts, the reforms aim to alleviate pressure on the High Court and reduce delays across the system.

Under the General Scheme, the Circuit Court will be empowered to hear matters up to a value of €100,000 (including for personal injuries), while the District Court will be empowered to hear matters up to a value of €20,000 (previously €75,000 and €15,000, respectively). 

Conclusion

The General Scheme represents a decisive effort to modernise Ireland’s civil justice system. It seeks to codify and refine civil litigation procedures, encouraging early case assessments and management, procedural discipline, and the efficient and cost-effective resolution of disputes.  

Reforms to judicial review under the General Scheme are also likely to provide greater certainty as to the procedures to be followed and the considerations given by the court when assessing any such applications.  

By reforming judicial review, streamlining procedures, and implementing rules to promote the early resolution of disputes, the General Scheme seeks to create a more efficient, predictable, and accessible justice system. Only time will tell whether the proposed changes will have the intended impact.