except by the attendance of the parties and witnesses on another day before the Adjudicator. This is a source of complaint as is failure to give notice that an interpreter is needed.
35.
Lack of uniformity is an argument in favour of merger with the Magistracy with its greater formality. Other arguments in favour
efficiency,
of merger are based mainly on public accessibility, and greater job-satisfaction for Magistrates.
cost
36.
I have also heard some doubts about the worth of a separate
small claims system, which denies legal representation and forensic formality, but it may be thought that the principle is so widely accepted that a proposal to return to more legalistic procedures would be seen as so regressive as to be likely to fail. In a compromise that has been suggested lawyers would be heard but with time limits for cross-examination and oral submissions and a requirement for some part of the submissions in writing. This may be worth pursuing but I
restrict my advice now
considerations which leave the guiding
principles unaffected. The most strongly pressed proposal is to transfer the work to the Magistracy; this proposal is also strongly
resisted.
to
37.
Its proponents point out that the Magistracy sits in eight places whilst the Tribunal sits in only three and that therefore the Magistracy would make the procedure more accessible. They say the economic consequences of merger would be some savings in judge power, staff and accommodation. They argue that many Magistrates are
qualified for civil work by their previous experience. And they stress
that
is bad for an unvarying workload of lengthy criminal lists Magistrates' morale and performance; diversification would improve work capability, it is said. I assume the proponents are assuming that the Adjudicators (who rank with Frincipal Magistrates) would be absorbed into the Magistracy. It is also said that the effectiveness and
standard of the Tribunal's performance has been disappointing.
95 -
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.