|
The small claims system, which operates in the county court, generally works well in providing a low cost, good quality procedure for large numbers of litigants. The procedure is informal and quicker than ordinary proceedings. It assists litigants to appear in person by providing greater judicial intervention and support and enables people to avoid incurring substantial legal costs in order to pursue small monetary claims. Nonetheless, while recognising the inherent qualities in the system, this inquiry has also identified a number of deficiencies and some potential for improvements
We have seen for ourselves that the county courts are still lacking proper IT facilities. We concluded that the provision of basic electronic document management and listing software could lead to substantial efficiencies. The current system is paper-intensive, which makes proceedings slower and leads to unnecessary waste.
It is also time for the Department to implement much sought-after improvements to the system of enforcing judgments. It is unacceptable that litigants, who at the conclusion of a case are led to believe that they have been successful, often find that the judgment that they have obtained is in a practical sense unenforceable.
The claims limits for cases involving personal injury and housing disrepair are in need of review. These are currently substantially lower than those for other claims which go through the small claims procedure. There is a need to protect vulnerable individuals, but disproportionate legal costs should not be recoverable.
Current proposals for a European Small Claims Procedure should prove a welcome improvement for those conducting cross border cases, but this system should not extend to wholly domestic cases.
| 
