HC Deb 05 July 1955 vol 543 cc1046-55
Mr. E. Fletcher

I beg to move, in page 5, line 43, to leave out "eighty" and insert "ninety."

The Deputy-Chairman

It may be for the convenience of the Committee if we consider at the same time the Amendment to line 46.

Mr. Fletcher

I am obliged to you, Sir Rhys, for your suggestion because the two Amendments raise precisely the same point.

My Amendment raises a point which was considered in some detail on Second Reading and goes to the root of the objects and purposes of this Bill. The Amendment seeks to increase the number of county court judges whom the Government will have power to appoint under this Measure because, if it is to work at all, it is essential that there should be an adequate number of county court judges.

In considering an earlier Amendment, the Attorney-General said that he did not want to find that we had transferred congestion from the High Court to the county court. None of us wants to find that, because one object of the Bill is to relieve the congestion in the High Court, and we all agree that it would be most undesirable if, as a result of the Bill, that congestion was transferred to the county courts.

The most obvious way of avoiding any such congestion in the county courts is to make sure that there is an adequate number of county court judges. The only question is what is the appropriate number? Originally it was 60. Today the number is 65. When a Bill similar to this in the preceding Parliament was introduced in another place the Government proposed that the authorised number of county court judges should be increased from 65 to 75. The Explanatory and Financial Memorandum to the present Bill also states that the proposed increase should be from 65 to 75, but the text of the Bill in Clause 8, which we are now considering, recommends that the increase should be from 65 to 80.

Now the figure of 80, as distinct from 75 has, I am sure, been selected by the Attorney-General largely because of the Amendment moved from the Opposition benches in another place in the lifetime of the previous Government recommending that the number of county court judges should be not 75 but 80. My Amendment suggests that the number should be increased to 90, but whatever the appropriate number may be, we on this side of the Committee are anxious to secure that under this Bill the Government should have power to appoint whatever may be found to be the necessary number of county court judges to ensure the satisfactory and expeditious working of this Measure. We feel that we can trust the Government not to appoint an unnecessary number beyond which the working of the Act may reveal to be the appropriate number.

At the same time, we are anxious to remind the Government that in our view one object of the Bill, which will be brought into operation at the same time as legal aid is extended to the county courts, is to ensure that for the first time all people of limited means will be able, without risk of undue hardship to themselves, to have full facilities for having their disputes tried in the county court. I have no doubt that the result of the twin operation of extending the county court jurisdiction and of introducing legal aid into the county court must inevitably be a considerable increase in the volume of litigation in the county courts.

On these benches at any rate we should welcome that, because it will mean that for the first time people of limited means, who, hitherto, have been deprived of having their injustices redressed, will at last be able to take their cases to the county court and obtain redress. The whole scheme will be unworkable, however, unless there are enough county court judges to make that possible, and we cannot tell at the moment what the precise number should be. Therefore, all we are seeking to do by the Amendment is to ensure that the Government have power, if necessary, to increase the number beyond 80 without having to come back to Parliament for further powers.

I am sure that I shall have the attention and sympathy of the Attorney-General in this matter. In the course of the Second Reading debate various speakers drew attention to one of the admitted evils of county court procedure as it exists at the moment; that is to say, the frequent experience of actions which go on for a considerable length of time. Instead of being finished in one day, or if necessary the following day and two or three succeeding days, as occurs in the High Court, we find in the county court that a long case which is not finished on a certain day is adjourned to a date a month hence, then perhaps is heard for two or three hours and, if it is not finished, is again adjourned for another month.

You know, Sir Rhys, as well as I and all Members of the Committee who have experience of these matters know, that this is a most unsatisfactory state of affairs. It is unsatisfactory for the legal advisers of the parties concerned, unsatisfactory for the witnesses, unsatisfactory for the litigants and unsatisfactory from the point of view of the county court judge. Obviously, he cannot be expected to administer justice so well, if he hears a case at intervals of from month to month, for two or three hours at a time, as the High Court judge who sits de die in diem until the case is finished.

8.0 p.m.

If the Bill is to be a success, it will be essential to have a reserve of county court judges, who, if necessary, can sit from day to day to deal with long cases. If litigants in county courts are to have the same kind of expeditious justice as in the High Court, it is essential for us to be sure that the Government have adequate power in deciding the number of county court judges to be appointed.

Let us remember that the Bill's primary object is not merely to avoid congestion in the High Court but to ensure that adequate justice is done in the county courts for a class of litigant who has not yet had the same accessibility to justice as is provided for those who can afford to go to the High Court. We must have an adequate number of county court judges to achieve that object. I am suggesting, not that we should fix the number of county court judges at 90 as distinct from 80, but that we should give the Government power to appoint up to 90, if it is found necessary to do so.

The Attorney-General

In moving the Amendment, the hon. Gentleman's theme was that we must have an adequate number of judges. I entirely agree with him. However, he advanced no argument to show that the number proposed in the Bill would be in the least degree inadequate or that the number that he proposes would be sufficient.

I completely agree with most of the hon. Member's propositions and generalities. It is essential that there should be an adequate number of county court judges. In determining whether or not the number should be varied from what it was when the Bill was originally introduced, and, indeed, in considering what number should be in the Bill when it was drafted, regard was had to that fact. The maximum authorised number, when the Bill was originally introduced, was increased from 65 to 75, an extra margin of ten.

As to the suggestions made by Members of another place, my noble Friend gave further consideration to the matter and made inquiries in different parts of the country, discussed local conditions with various county court judges, and then decided that, although the increase originally proposed from 65 to 75 would probably be sufficient, the position was sufficiently uncertain, particularly having regard to the extension of legal aid to the county courts as well as the increase in the jurisdiction of the county courts, to justify him in increasing the number by 15 to 80. Having gone into the matter, he thinks that that will provide him with an adequate number of judges, and an adequate margin.

That decision was reached before I moved the Amendment, which the Com- mittee accepted, to institute the so-called cushion. The effect of that is certain to be, I should think, a reduction in some of the pressure which would otherwise fall upon the county courts. Now that the cushion is there, the number of county court judges who will be adequate may well be less than would have been adequate if the cushion had not been provided, but we have no reason to suppose that 80 is not more than sufficient to deal with all the problems to which the hon. Gentleman referred. Therefore, I must resist his Amendment.

Mr. Mitchison

I find that answer very unsatisfactory. I have a suspicion that when the maximum number of county court judges stood in the text of the Bill at 75 the right hon. and learned Gentleman would have risen with the same assurance to tell us that he saw no reason why 75 should not be sufficient.

He has already explained to us that the results of the Bill are unpredictable in the volume of additional litigation which will be brought to the county courts. That stands to reason. It seems to me unlikely that the considerable increase which is being made in the jurisdiction of the county courts will not lead to bigger demands for county court judges which may well go beyond the additional fifteen proposed.

However, that does not seem to me to be the point. The point is that none of us can speak with any certainly on these matters, or even with any real approach to certainty. I should be very interested to know exactly what happened when the Lord Chancellor made his inquiries in sundry places from county court judges and others. The one thing of which I am certain is that none of those gentlemen could have given any answer with any degree of accuracy.

I now come to the question of flexibility. Whenever I hear the right hon. and learned Gentleman talking about flexibility, I wonder what is coming. Last time he was exceedingly flexible on the question of whether or not further legislation was required to increase the jurisdiction of county courts. That is a question upon which I should have thought flexibility was somewhat doubtful. However, if ever there was a case for flexibility. I should have thought that one found it here, particularly for the reason which the right hon. and learned Gentleman provided just now.

He explained—I entirely agree—that the extension of legal aid to the county courts is bound to have a very considerable effect in this matter. He told us earlier that the terms and method of the extension were still under negotiation. If legal aid is extended in such a form that it really provides sufficient aid for those who go to the county courts—that is something about which many of us have our doubts already, premature though they may be—I should have thought that an extension of county court work more than proportionate to the proposed increase in the maximum number of judges was well within the bounds of possibility.

If the right hon. and learned Gentleman and the Government generally were so prepared to be flexible on the subject of jurisdiction, surely the very least they can do is to be more flexible about the question of the number of county court judges required. We do not want the county courts to be choked with work, We do not know what the effect of the Bill will be or what the effect of the

extension of legal aid will be, and we do not even know the terms of that extension. In those circumstances, to force the House of Commons to pass another piece of legislation if the figure of 80 is found insufficient seems to be improvident folly.

We have already had a maximum of 75 proposed, but 75 was not enough, and, with remarkable readiness, the figure was changed to 80. Is there any real reason why a further extension could not be made? Surely, it is the business of the right hon. and learned Gentleman to tell us why the original number of 75 and 80 is now thought to be adequate, rather than for us to say why we think the extension which we propose will meet the case. We are not proposing an increase in the number of county court judges; we are simply proposing that there should be power to make that increase without coming to the House for another Act of Parliament for that purpose.

Question put, That "eighty" stand part of the Clause:—

The Committee divided: Ayes 206, Noes 160.

Division No. 18.] AYES [8.10 p.m
Agnew, Cmdr. P. G. Cunningham, S. K. Heath, Edward
Aitken, W. T. Currie, G. B. H. Henderson, John (Cathcart)
Allan, R. A. (Paddington, S.) Dance, J. C. G. Hill, Mrs. E. (Wythenshawe)
Alport, C. J. M. D'Avigdor-Goldsmid, Sir Henry Hill, John (S. Norfolk)
Anstruther-Gray, Major W. J. Deedes, W. F. Hinchingbrooke, Viscount
Arbuthnot, John Digby, S. Wingfield Hopkinson, Rt. Hon. Henry
Ashton, H. Donaldson, Cmdr. C. E. McA. Hornsby-Smith, Miss M. P.
Atkins, H. E. Doughty, C. J. A. Horobin, Sir Ian
Baldock, Lt.-Cmdr. J. M. Dugdale, Rt. Hon. Sir T. (Richmond) Horsbrugh, Rt. Hon. Dame Florence
Balniel, Lord Eden,Rt.Hn.SirA.(Warwick&L'm'tn) Howard, Hon. Greville (St. Ives)
Banks, Col. C. Elliot, Rt. Hon. W. E. Howard, John (Test)
Barter, John Emmet, Hon. Mrs. Evelyn Hudson, Sir Austin (Lewisham, N.)
Baxter, Sir Beverley Errington, Sir Eric Hughes Hallett, Vice-Admiral J.
Bell, Philip (Bolton, E.) Fell, A. Hughes-Young, M. H. C.
Bell, Ronald (Bucks, S.) Finlay, Graeme Hyde, Montgomery
Bevins, J. R. (Toxteth) Fleetwood-Hesketh, R. F. Hylton-Foster, Sir H. B. H.
Bidgood, J. C. Fort, R. Iremonger, T. L.
Birch, Rt. Hon. Nigel Fraser, Sir Ian (M'cmbe & Lonsdale) Irvine, Bryant Godman (Rye)
Black C. W. Freeth, D. K. Jenkins, Robert (Dulwich)
Body, R. F. Gammans, L. D. Jennings, J. C. (Burton)
Bossom, Sir A. C. Glover, D. Johnson, Dr. Donald (Carlisle)
Boyle, Sir Edward Gomme-Duncan, Col. A. Johnson, Eric (Blackley)
Braithwaite, Sir Albert (Harrow, W.) Gough, C. F. H. Jones, A. (Hall Green)
Browne, J. Nixon (Craigton) Gower, H. R. Kaberry, D.
Bryan, P. Graham, Sir Fergus Kerby, Capt. H. B.
Buchan-Hepburn, Rt. Hon. P. G. T. Grant, W. (Woodside) Kerr, H. W.
Bullus, Wing Commander E. E. Green, A. Kershaw, J. A.
Burden, F. F. A. Grimond, J. Kirk, P. M.
Butcher, Sir Herbert Grimston, Sir Robert (Westbury) Lagden, G. W.
Carr, Robert Gurden, Harold Lancaster, Col. C. G.
Chichester-Clark, R. Hall, John (Wycombe) Leavey, J. A.
Clarke, Brig. Terence (Portsmth, w.) Hare, Hon. J. H. Leburn, W. G.
Cole, Norman Harris, Reader (Heston) Legge-Bourke, Maj. E. A. H.
Cooper-Key, E. M. Harrison, A. B. C. (Maldon) Legh, Hon. Peter (Petersfield)
Corfield, Capt. F. V. Harvey, Air Cdre. A. V. (Macclesfd) Linstead, Sir H. N.
Craddock, Beresford (Spelthorne) Harvey, Ian (Harrow, E.) Lloyd, Maj. Sir Guy (Renfrew, E.)
Crookshank, Capt. Rt. Hn. H. F. C. Harvey, John (Walthamstow, E.) Lloyd, Rt. Hon. Selwyn (Wirral)
Crouch, R. F. Harvie-Watt, Sir George Longden, Gilbert
Crowder, Sir John (Finchley) Heald, Rt. Hon. Sir Lionel Lucas, Sir Jocelyn (Portsmouth, S.)
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Pickthorn, K. W. M. Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. P. L. (Hereford)
McCallum, Major Sir Duncan Pitman, I. J. Thomas, Leslie (Canterbury)
Macdonald, Sir Peter Pott, H. P. Thompson, Kenneth (Walton)
Mackeson, Brig. Sir Harry Powell, J. Enoch Thompson, Lt.-Cdr.R.(Croydon, S.)
McKibbin, A. J. Price, David (Eastleigh) Thornton-Kemsley, C. N.
Mackie, J. H. (Galloway) Price, Henry (Lewisham, W.) Tiley, A. (Bradford, W.)
McLaughlin, Mrs. P. Rawlinson, P. A. G. Touche, Sir Gordon
McLean, Neil (Inverness) Redmayne, M. Turner, H. F. L.
Macleod, Rt. Hon. Iain (Enfield, W.) Renton, D. L. M. Vaughan-Morgan, J. K.
MacLeod, John (Ross & Cromarty) Ridsdale, J. E. Vickers, Miss J. H.
Maddan, Martin Robinson, Sir Roland (Blackpool, S.) Wade, D. W.
Maitland, Cdr. J. F. W. (Horncastle) Robson-Brown, W. Wakefield, Edward (Derbyshire, W.)
Manningham-Buller, Rt. Hn. Sir R. Roper, Sir Harold Walker-Smith, D. C.
Markham, Major Sir Frank Schofield, Lt.-Col. W. Wall, Major Patrick
Marlowe, A. A. H. Scott-Miller, Cmdr. R. Ward, Hon. George (Worcester)
Marples, A. E. Shepherd, William Ward, Miss I. (Tynemouth)
Marshall, Douglas Simon, J. E. S. (Middlesbrough, W.) Waterhouse, Capt. Rt. Hon. C.
Maude, Angus Soames, Capt. C. Webbe, Sir H.
Medlicott, Sir Frank Spearman, A. C. M. Whitelaw, W.S.I.(Penrith 4 Border)
Milligan, Rt. Hon. W. R. Speir, R. M. Williams, Rt. Hn. Charles (Torquay)
Nabarro, G. D. N. Spence, H. R. (Aberdeen, W.) Williams, Gerald (Tonbridge)
Nairn, D. L. S. Spens, Rt. Hn. Sir P. (Kens'gt'n, S.) Williams, Paul (Sunderland, S.)
O'Neill, Hn. Phelim (Co. Antrim, N.) Stanley, Capt. Hon. Richard Wills, G. (Bridgwater)
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. W. D. Steward, Harold (Stockport, S.) Wilson, Geoffrey (Truro)
Orr-Ewing, Charles Ian (Hendon, N.) Steward, Sir William (Woolwich, W.) Wood, Hon. R.
Orr-Ewing, Sir Ian (Weston-S-Mare) Stewart, Henderson (Fife, E.) Woollam, John Victor
Osborne, C. Storey, S. Yates, William (The Wrekin)
Page, R. G. Studholme, H. G.
Pannell, N. A. (Kirkdale) Summers, G. S. (Aylesbury) TELLERS FOR THE AYES:
Peake, Rt. Hon. O. Sumner, W. D. M. (Orpington) Colonel J. A. Harrison and
Peyton, J. W. W. Teeling, W. Mr. Barber.
NOES
Ainsley, J. w. Gaitskell, Rt. Hon. H. T. N. Marquand, Rt. Hon. H. A.
Albu, A. H. Gibson, C. W. Mayhew, C. P.
Allaun, F. (Salford, E.) Greenwood, Anthony Mitohison, G. R.
Allen, Scholefield (Crewe) Grenfell, Rt. Hon. D. R. Monslow, W.
Anderson, Frank Grey, C. F. Moody, A. S.
Awbery, S. S. Griffiths, Rt. Hon. James (Llanelly) Morris, Percy (Swansea, W.)
Bacon, Miss Alice Griffiths, William (Exchange) Mort, D. L.
Bartley, P. Hale, Leslie Moss, R.
Benn, Hn. Wedgwood (Bristol, S.E.) Hall, Rt. Hn. Glenvil (Colne Valley) Moyle, A.
Benson, G. Hall, John T. (Gateshead, W.) Neal, Harold (Bolsover)
Bevan, Rt. Hon. A. (Ebbw Vale) Hamilton, W. W. Oliver, G. H.
Blackburn, F. Hannan, W. Oram, A. E.
Boardman, H. Hastings, S. Orbach, M.
Bottomley, Rt. Hon. A. G. Hayman, F. H. Oswald, T.
Bowden, H. W. (Leicester, S.W.) Herblson, Miss M. Owen, W. J.
Bowles, F. G. Hewitson, Capt. M. Padley, W. E.
Boyd, T. C. Hobson, C. R. Paling, Rt. Hon. W. (Dearne Valley)
Braddock, Mrs. Elizabeth Holman, P. Pannell, Charles (Leads, W.)
Brockway, A. F. Holmes, Horace Pargiter, G. A.
Brown, Rt. Hon. George (Belper) Houghton, Douglas Parkin, B. T.
Brown, Thomas (Ince) Howell, Charles (Perry Barr) Paton, J.
Burke, W. A. Howell, Denis (All Saints) Pearson, A.
Butler, Mrs. Joyce (Wood Green) Hughes, Cledwyn (Anglesey) Probert, A. R.
Callaghan, L. J. Hughes, Emrys (S. Ayrshire) Proctor, W. T.
Carmichael, J. Hughes, Hector (Aberdeen, N.) Pursey, Cmdr. H.
Champion, A. J. Hunter, A. E. Rankin, John
Clunie, J. Hynd, H. (Accrington) Reid, William
Coldrick, W. Hynd, J. B. (Attercliffe) Roberts, Albert (Normanton)
Collick, P. H, (Birkenhead) Irvine, A. J. (Edge Hill) Roberts, Goronwy (Caernarvon)
Cove, W. G. Irving, S. (Dartford) Ross, William
Craddock, Ceorge (Bradford, S.) Isaacs, Rt. Hon. G. A. Short, E. W.
Cronin, J. D. Jay, Rt. Hon. D. P. T. Simmons, C. J. (Brierley Hill)
Crossman, R. H. S. Johnston, Douglas (Paisley) Slater, Mrs. H. (Stoke, N.)
Cullen, Mrs. A. Jones, Rt. Hon.A.Creech (Wakefield) Slater, J. (Sedgefield)
Davies, Ernest (Enfield, E.) Jones, Jack (Rotherham) Snow, J. W.
Davies, Harold (Leek) Jones, J. Idwal (Wrexham) Sorensen, R. W.
Davies, Stephen (Merthyr) Key, Rt. Hon. C. W. Sparks, J. A.
Delargy, H. J. King, Dr. H. M. Steele, T.
Donnelly, D. L. Lawson, G. M. Stewart, Michael (Fulham)
Dye, S. Ledger, R. J. Stones, W. (Consett)
Edelman, M. Lee, Frederick (Newton) Summerskill, Rt. Hon. E.
Edwards, Rt. Hon. Ness (Caerphilly) Lever, Leslie (Ardwick) Taylor, John (West Lothian)
Edwards, Robert (Bilston) Lewis, Arthur Thomas, lorwerth (Rhondda, W.)
Edwards, W. J. (Stepney) Lindgren, G. S. Ungoed-Thomas, Sir Lynn
Evans, Edward (Lowestoft) Logan, D. G. Viant, S. P.
Evans, Stanley (Wednesbury) McGhee, H. G. Warbey, W. N.
Fernyhough, E. Mclnnes, J. Watkins, T. E.
Fletcher, Eric McKay, John (Wallsend) Weitzman, D.
Fraser, Thomas (Hamilton) Mahon, S. Wells, Peroy (Faversham)
Wells, William (Walsall, N.) Williams, Ronald (Wigan) Winterbottom, Richard
West, D. G. Williams, Rt. Hon. T. (Don Valley) Yates, V. (Ladywood)
Wheeldon, W. E. Williams, W. T. (Barons Court) Younger, Rt. Hon. K.
Wilcock, Group Capt. C. A. B. Willis, E. G. (Edinburgh, E.)
Williams, Rev. Llywelyn (Ab'tillery) Wilson, Rt. Hon. Harold (Huyton) TELLERS EOR THE NOES:
Mr. J. Johnson and Mr. J. T. Price.

Question put and agreed to.

Clause ordered to stand part of the Bill.