§ 37. Mr. Hector Hughesasked the Attorney-General if he will request the Commission on Reform of Judicial Procedure and Law Reform to inquire into possible ways of reducing appeals in both civil and criminal cases to one appeal, which allows for a mistake by the trial judge, and of avoiding the multiplicity of appeals, which imposes unnecessary financial and other hardship on both litigants and accused persons.
§ The Attorney-GeneralVarious ways of restricting the avenues of appeal in civil cases were considered by the Evershed Committee on Supreme Court Practice and Procedure and my noble 23 Friend the Lord Chancellor hopes that it will be possible to implement its recommendations as soon as a suitable opportunity arises. I am not aware of any grounds for altering the present arrangements for criminal appeals.
§ Mr. HughesDoes not my right hon. Friend realise that the plurality of appeals is an undue and unfair aspersion on Her Majesty's judges? The assumption is that they make mistakes in court after court and that litigants are drawn from one court to another at their own expense because the judge may be wrong.
§ The Attorney-GeneralI am not aware that Her Majesty's judges feel so aspersed, if there is such a word, but the Evershed Committee has considered the idea of a leap-frogging arrangement from the High Court direct to the House of Lords in a limited class of case. My noble Friend hopes to introduce legislation to give effect to that when a convenient time arises.
§ Mr. St. John-StevasWill the Attorney-General concentrate his noted abilities on eradicating the defects in our system of criminal appeals and set his face against the proposal, put forward by Justice, for setting up a new committee to retry all criminal cases?
§ The Attorney-GeneralThat matter has not been considered yet. It is an interesting proposal, but I share the view concerning the risk that the authority of the courts can be undermined by an excess of review procedures.