2
-
with the Registrar of the Supreme Court. As a result Members are keenly aware and deeply concerned that the heavy workload of the Tribunals makes it difficult to meet the 60-day limit and a further increase in workload which is anticipated from the increase in jurisdiction, will worsen the situation. It is understood that on occasions the statutory time limit for setting cases down for hearing can only be complied with by an administrative arrangement whereby organisations which wish to file large batches of claims at one time are requested to stagger the filing. Although this administrative arrangement is never applied to claims by private individuals the situation is regarded as unsatisfactory by the Registrar of the Supreme Court; and members of the Ad Hoc Group wholeheartedly agree
with him.
Nevertheless the solution, as we see it, does not lie in extending the statutory time limit; for to do so would be to erode one of the fundamental principles on which the Small Claims Tribunal legislation is based
that persons with small claims should have speedy
access to a judicial tribunal. The better course, in
our view, is to retain the present statutory time limit
and to deploy sufficient resources to meet it. If it
proves to be the case that existing staffing levels
are clearly inadequate to make the legislation effective
then the Administration will no doubt consider
recommending an increase in public expenditure in order
to make the legislation work, and if so, Members will support this recommendation. For the moment, however,
it is the view of the Ad Hoc Group that the principle
of speedy access to Small Claims Tribunals must not
be eroded - and it is on this basis that I shall be
moving an amendment in Committee to retain the present
limit of 60 days.
-
Sir, with these remarks, I support the motion.