A senior judge has called for a new government to put an end to the “torrent” of legislation which has made the legal system incomprehensible to both judges and the public.
Judge Charles Harris, QC, president of the 600-strong Council of Circuit Judges, told The Times that judges now had to have criminal law explained to them by academic experts as it had become so complex.
Judge Harris also felt that civil law was so complex that some laws were “completely beyond the grasp of people to whom they apply”.
“Law which is not readily comprehensive is unfair law, because those to whom it applies have to spend time, money and anxiety in finding out by litigation what their obligations are.”
As the head of the judicial rank handling all serious cases in the Crown and county courts, Judge Harris pointed out that an average of 2,629 laws a year had been produced by the last 3 prime ministers.
He added that in the last eight years, there were between 40 and 70 Acts of Parliament and more than three thousand statutory instruments a year.
“Some substantive civil law is so complex that it is wholly inaccessible to the laymen to whom it applies and not much easier to understand for lawyers.”
Using the consumer credit laws as an example, Judge Harris said: “Academics graze contented in its thickets, while the people to whom the law applies have no choice but to sign contracts which they do not understand.”
The editor of Archbold, the criminal law compendium described the state of the criminal laws as a disgrace.
Judge Harris called for a bill to rationalise and consolidate the criminal laws, prune out all the statutes and put an end to all legislation.
“It is vital to remember that laws should not be run up in haste and flung, as a palliative reaction, at every problem which may arise.”
Judge Harris comments came as another judge warned the public that they are “best off having nothing to do” with litigation.
“I am sympathetic to all litigants who get caught up in our legal system,” were Court of Appeal judge, Lord Justice Mummery’s sentiments as he pointed out the complexities of modern court cases and high lawyer’s fees.
The judge who is the country’s foremost expert on employment law, added: “The law is best kept as far away as possible; you’re best off having nothing to do with it”.
These comments were made as the judge rejected an appeal by a Devon lord of the manor against a bill for almost 15,000 that followed an Employment Tribunal hearing.
“A travesty of justice” is how David Piper, Lord of Manor of Warleigh described the compensation award after a disability discrimination claim, as he made his argument.
However, Lord Justice Mummery described Piper’s challenge to the payout as having “no reasonable prospect of success”, while reminding him of the legal bills and minefield he’d face by proceeding with the appeal.
Want to find out more about legal issues relating to personal injury then visit Duncan Gibbins Solicitors website for specialist advice on compensation.
