HL Deb 10 March 1965 vol 264 cc55-8

2.55 p.m.

VISCOUNT DILHORNE

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

[The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government whether it is proposed to confer on the county courts jurisdiction to try undefended divorce cases; and what is the estimated annual saving to the taxpayer which would be effected by this reform of the law.]

THE LORD CHANCELLOR (LORD GARDINER)

My Lords, the Government will consider the first of the noble and learned Viscount's questions in the light of a detailed inquiry which I have initiated into the second.

VISCOUNT DILHORNE

My Lords, does the noble and learned Lord recollect that the first law reform he recommended in his book Law Reform Now was this transfer of jurisdiction? Did he not say then: In any case, undefended divorce cases should be transferred to the county courts instead of, as now, being tried by county court judges acting as High Court judges for the day"? Does this transfer of jurisdiction depend on just the financial consideration? Would it not be to the great convenience of many litigants if this transfer were made?

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

My Lords, I am not in any way unsympathetic to the proposal. I think I myself suggested it first to the Committee on Divorce Procedure presided over by the noble and learned Lord, Lord Denning, fifteen years ago. But the views of the Church of England and other Churches have to be considered, and one would have to see what saving would be effected. This is not easy to ascertain. I am at the moment having a number of specimen divorce bills of costs taxed by experienced registrars of county courts, to see exactly what the saving would be.

VISCOUNT DILHORNE

My Lords, could not the noble and learned Lord give an approximate estimate, not at all precise, as to the amount of saving that would be likely to be involved? Am I not right in thinking that some investigation of the possible saving of costs has been made? And, quite apart from the saving in costs, would it not be to the convenience of many litigants if this transfer were made? Further, bearing in mind that the noble and learned Lord reached his conclusions many years ago, as he indicated, may we have an indication of the possible date when, if he is in favour of this reform, it may be carried into effect?

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

Some preliminary inquiry has been made into the saving which would be effected, but the question is not altogether easy. For example, at first sight there would be a saving, in so far as the amount of court fees payable in the county court are less than those in the High Court; but as the fees go to the Exchequer this does not represent, in fact, a saving to the Exchequer. As to the date when a decision will be made, I am afraid I am unable to give the noble and learned Viscount a date. There is, of course, a committee of the Church of England considering this and other matters, of which the right reverend Prelate the Lord Bishop of Exeter is the chairman. I shall wish to see how soon that committee is likely to report.

VISCOUNT DILHORNE

My Lords, may we take it that the noble and learned Lord's opinion has not changed from the opinion he expressed so firmly many months ago?

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

My personal opinion has not changed.

LORD SILKIN

My Lords, may I ask whether in the consideration of this matter full weight will be given to the convenience and saving of expense to the litigants themselves, apart from the purely legal costs? Would the noble and learned Lord agree with my own view that the saving to litigants in not having to make a journey to London would possibly be even greater than the saving of the purely legal costs?

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

Yes, my Lords. The saving to the litigant is, of course, a question of primary concern; but in the dissolution of marriage we are concerned also with an alteration of status and that has to be taken into account.

BARONESS SUMMERSKILL

My Lords, can the noble and learned Lord tell the House what particular religious principle will be transgressed if this reform is introduced?

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

My Lords, this matter was carefully considered by, among others, the Committee presided over by the noble and learned Lord, Lord Denning, and they took the view, which had been impressed on them by the Churches, that the status of marriage would be lowered in the eyes of the public if this matter were dealt with in the county courts rather than in the High Court.

THE LORD BISHOP OF LEICESTER

My Lords, may I ask the noble and learned Lord whether he agrees with me that the current emphasis in Church of England thought on this matter is on the necessity for a thorough and radical reform of divorce procedures, rather than on the maintenance of some particular institution?

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

My Lords, I understand that that is so. That is one of the reasons why, if too long a period of time does not elapse, I should prefer, before deciding this question, to learn the views of the committee presided over by the right reverend Prelate the Lord Bishop of Exeter.

VISCOUNT DILHORNE

My Lords, while agreeing with the right reverend Prelate in the views he has expressed, may I ask whether the noble and learned Lord really thinks that a question of status is involved between a hearing before a county court judge, sitting as a High Court Judge on a commission of one and being addressed as "My Lord", and a county court judge, sitting in precisely the same court the very same day and being addressed as "Your Honour"?

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

My Lords, these are matters of opinion, but they are questions on which the Churches are entitled to express their own views.