Litigants in Person

There is nothing like party political conference season to encourage our leading politicians to make eye catching policy announcements, often without supporting details, leaving the rest of us to ponder what the practical ramifications will be. I see that Lib Dem Justice Minister Simon Hughes has announced that we can shortly expect the Government to announce plans to tackle the issues raised by the growing number of litigants in person. I have commented in the past on the major effects that this is having as they attempt to come to grips with a system which can be complex and confusing – and that is just the court system itself never mind the underlying laws that govern the decision making process. This is at a time when the courts are subject to ever further cuts including making staff and counter/telephone support ever more limited and often nonexistent and with a constant drift to centralise the court buildings making them less accessible for service users. However whilst litigants in person may need improved support my concern remains for those who instruct solicitors to present their cases properly and promptly but face litigants in person against them. Will this issue also be addressed? Why should my clients face a larger bill than would otherwise be the case because litigants in person are clogging the system, extending waiting times and hearing lengths and missing clear deadlines apparently without sanction. I also fail to see why litigants who employ a lawyer should have greater responsibility for preparing bundles etc simply because the other side has decided to go it alone. It may be that this is desirable and on occasions the offer will be made by the lawyer but it is now often becoming assumed by the court. I have recently been fighting a case in an outer London county court where the other side is in acting in person and quite understandably is struggling. However the sums in dispute are significant. We are following the rules but our opponent is not but is constantly being allowed further chances by the Judges resulting in additional and often irrecoverable costs being incurred. I have no problem with Judges sympathising with the plight of litigants in person but what about some sympathy for those on the other side and action to protect them from the costs ramifications of litigants in person.