§ 3.38 p.m.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR (LORD GARDINER)My Lords, with the permission of the House, I should like to make a Statement about the setting up of a Royal Commission. My right honourable friend the Prime Minister is making a similar Statement in another place during the course of this afternoon.
As the House knows, I have for some time been considering the arrangements for the trial of civil actions outside London. But as these arrangements necessarily affect criminal business too, the Government have now decided that a far-reaching inquiry into the whole of the present system of assizes and quarter sessions is desirable.
Her Majesty has been pleased to approve the recommendation that a Royal Commission should be appointed with the following terms of reference:
To inquire into the present arrangements for the administration of justice at Assizes and at Quarter Sessions outside Greater London, and to report what reforms should be made 1826 for the more convenient, economic and efficient disposal of the civil and criminal business at present dealt with by those courts.My right honourable friend the Prime Minister hopes to announce the names of the Chairman and other members of the Royal Commission after the Recess.
VISCOUNT COLVILLE OF CULROSSMy Lords, I am sure the whole House will be grateful to the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor for giving that important Statement to us this afternoon. I think probably the whole of the House, the legal profession and those concerned in these matters, will welcome a full ranging examination of this problem, which has been the subject of a great deal of discussion of late.
May I ask the noble and learned Lord one or two brief questions? I know there will be many questions to be considered, but I hope these will not fall outside the range of the matters to be covered by the Royal Commission. First, does the noble and learned Lord envisage that extensive consultations and inquiries will be necessary before the Royal Commission can come to some conclusion? I know people always ask for speedy answers from such Commissions, but this one does not brook of any delay and, as I see it, only the legal and the local authority circles, particularly in the Assize towns, should have to be consulted, and I would hope the noble and learned Lord takes the view that there should not be a tremendous amount of outside consultation, although obviously that which is necessary will be done.
Second, will the Royal Commission be able to deal with points like the time 1827 wasted on commission days, if it is wasted, which to some of us seems to be the case? Will it deal with the phasing of quarter sessions in various areas? I believe at the moment this is arranged more or less informally between the town clerks and the county clerks of the places concerned, and by no means is there always a harmonious result, either for the judge who may be the chairman of the quarter sessions or indeed for the Bar.
Third, will there be some fairly far-reaching review of civil matters which are at present tried before quarter sessions? I am loth to suggest the end of the traditional civil and administrative jurisdiction of quarter sessions, but the fact remains that there are, under the Public Health and Local Government Acts, a number of appeals which I should have thought could easily go either to the county court or, in some cases, to a public inquiry. Finally, if this is the case and there are borderline issues between administration and justice which the Royal Commission feels would not necessarily be best dealt with either by the county court or by a local government inquiry, say under the Ministry of Housing and Local Government, is there the possibility of a new body of inspectors, responsible to the Lord Chancellor himself, being set up to deal with these matters?
§ 3.43 p.m.
§ LORD OGMOREMy Lords, on behalf of my noble friends and myself, I should like to thank the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack for making this important Statement to us to-day. We feel that this whole subject has long been overdue for examination, particularly as regards the civil jurisdiction of assizes.
I would ask three questions. First, is any consideration going to be given by the Commission to the location of the district registries of the High Court? In isolated and sparsely populated districts such as mid-Wales it is important that there should be district registries nearby even though the number of Assize courts may be cut down. Secondly, may I ask him to look into the question of the jurisdiction of the county courts, which as the noble Viscount, Lord Colville of Culross, said, affects the question? Third, may I 1828 ask the noble and learned Lord to inquire into whether the complexity of the matter, and not the value of the subject matter at stake, should be the question which determines whether a man goes to the county court or to the High Court?
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORMy Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lords for what they have said. With reference to the points raised by the noble Viscount, I would agree that I do not think it is necessary for there to be very extensive inquiries. I cannot quite agree that only legal bodies and local authorities are concerned, because I believe a matter of considerable relevance is the convenience of parties, witnesses and jurymen and I would hope that their convenience would be studied with at least as much care as that of the lawyers.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORI think all the points raised by the noble Viscount would be within the terms of reference of the Royal Commisssion, as would also be the location of district registries, they being, of course, part of the High Court. Naturally I cannot say to what conclusions they will come, or even which specific subjects they will deal with, but your Lordships will have observed that the terms of reference have been drafted, intentionally, very wide so as to pose the broad question: how, where and by whom should those cases, both civil and criminal, which are now taken at Assizes, and cases of a civil character taken at quarter sessions, be heard? So it will open to anyone who favours Crown courts or a decentralisation of the High Court, or any other form, to say so.
In answer to the second point raised by the noble Lord, Lord Ogmore, I do not think the jurisdiction of the county court will really come within the terms of reference of this Royal Commission, unless of course they are of the opinion that any of the cases now heard either at Assizes or at quarter sessions ought to be tried in the county courts.
VISCOUNT COLVILLE OF CULROSSMy Lords, I am grateful for what the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor has said. On the question of consultation, despite the chuckles from noble Lords on the other side of the House I 1829 had not intended to ignore the claims of jurors and of witnesses, but I was speaking of consultation. Will the noble and learned Lord say whether there is any association which represents witnesses or jurors and with whom there could be consultations? I have not heard of one and it may well be that thought should be given to this. But with respect I would have thought this ought to be the job of the Royal Commission itself and not a matter for consultation.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORMy Lords, I think there could be both. We have the science of sociology: there is the National Council of Social Service, Citizens' Advice Bureaux, and those who are professionally concerned with ordinary members of the public. But I would agree that it is of importance that there should be on the Royal Commission somebody who is not a lawyer at all but who will regard primarily the convenience of the ordinary people, remembering that the law exists for the people and not vice versa.
§ LORD OGMOREMy Lords, I am not quite clear about the answer the noble and learned Lord gave me. Am I to take it that if the Royal Commission feels, as many of us do, that the jurisdiction of the county court is now wrongly based, that it should be a question of complexity and not value, it could make a recommendation of that kind? Could it say, "This type of case should go to the county court", irrespective of the value of the subject matter?
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORYes, if it thought that some of these civil cases now being taken at Assizes should be heard by county courts it could say so. I should then have to consider it, or the Government would, because it could hardly be satisfactory that certain classes of actions should be tried at county courts instead of Assizes, whereas High Court actions in London should remain as they are. I apprehend that any change in the jurisdiction of the county court should apply inside London as well as outside.
§ LORD BLYTONMy Lords, could the noble and learned Lord tell me whether the terms of reference brings within its ambit the expedition of certain civil cases and divorce cases in the provinces?
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORDivorce cases are heard outside Greater London, and that would certainly be within the Commission's terms of reference.