The Gazette 1974

THE DISTRICT COURT Changes which have affected the District Court Transport: By reason of the change in distribution of population through the country it is accepted that certain District Court sittings could be abolished, or the number of sittings reduced, but in this respect, the Socicty would like to have the views of the practitioners in these specific areas, as appended hereto, noted. How- ever, in relation to transport it should be noted that while private motor cars and hackney cars are available to most people now, they are costly and even where they can be afforded, there is a substantial number of people who may be obliged to attend Courts from time to time and who must depend solely on public transport. The greater part of public transport available emanates from Dublin and provides transport between Dublin and specific centres radiating from Dublin along the east coast to the south, to the south-west, to the west and to the north. In many instances there is no public transport, which will provide a service travelling in an east/west direction, or in the midland and western areas will provide a service travelling north/south. There are very many areas through the country where a person dependent on public transport and wishing to attend, particularly one of the suggested venues for the Circuit Criminal Court, would be obliged to travel quite a distance from his home by public transport to a centre from which he could in turn find public transport leading to the particular Court venue. In many instances the distance involved is substantial. One can instance, as for example, a person resident in South Kildare area and wishing to attend Portlaoise Criminal Court, would be obliged by public transport to travel from Athy to Naas by bus and from Naas to Portlaoise by bus, a' distance of some fifty miles and impossible to achieve in one day. There are many areas in a similar position. Criminal Procedure Act, 1967, Summary Judgment Rules and Changes in Enforcement of Court Orders: While the introduction of the Criminal Procedure Act, 1967, has resulted in a saving in time, the tendency recently has been for defendants in many cases to ask for oral evidence on deposition. This request is becom- ing more common and the number of cases in which oral depositions will be called for, will increase in future. This is partly by reason of the unsatisfactory presentation on deposition of available evidence. While the Summary Judgment Rules have resulted in saving time, it must be remembered that a default procedure was always available in the District Court and that while the majority of Summary Judgment cases do not now reach Court, the amount of Court time saved in relation to the old default procedure is generally not great. In so far as Enforcement of Court Orders are concerned, the application to the Court for Examination Orders takes up proportionally very little time in most Courts through the country. Increased Jurisdiction: Inflation has to some extent overtaken the advantages of the increase in the juris- diction of the District Court and the number and importance of civil actions being tried in that Court has abated. In the type of case which now reaches the District Court, the specialist witness is usually the injured party's local doctor, or in so far as damage to vehicles is concerned, the local garage proprietor. The other witnesses are more often than not, a local mem- ber of the Garda, who investigated the accident, the plaintiff and defendant and their respective witnesses,

the majority of whom are people resident in the location of the place at which the particular accident occurred and as the District Court is presently constituted, are usually within easy reach of the Court at which the claim is heard. While at times it may be necessary t° have a specialist medical adviser attend Court, u s u a l l) from the county hospital in the county where the accident occurred and who may be obliged to travel some distance to the particular Court, nonetheless) t he cost of having that one specialist witness travel to Court is far less than the cost of transporting all of the other witnesses to a Court which may be quite som e distance away from the locality in which they reside' with the consequent additional travelling expenses and loss of their valuable time. Most people are now work' ing a five-day week and accordingly the loss of a day s work to a person engaged in business on his own behalti by being obliged to attend Court, is substantial. ^ saving in witnesses' time and of the expense of com- pensating witnesses adequately for their loss through attendance in Court, is a major factor in keeping tb e cost of litigationw ithin reasonable limits. Apart alto- gether from this fact, many people are reluctant to attend Court by reason of the loss of income which they will incur. A witness obliged to attend Court b> service of a witness summons is often a reluctant fit- ness. He often tends in his reluctance and in his feeling of frustration in being obliged to attend Court, when 111 his mind he has something far more important to do» to be an unsatisfactory witness, who blames, not tb f system, but rather the particular lawyer who has bee 11 obliged to serve a witness summons upon him. Th e inconvenience caused to the public is therefore a veO important aspect of the problem which exists in thi 5 respect, coupled with the difficulty of adequately com- pensating witnesses in respect of their attendance 111 Court. System of Districts: There is no doubt whatever b ut that the present system of having a Judge or Justic e permanently assigned to a district has worked perfectly ?nJ. there seems to be no reason to suggest that an) change s'iould now take place. Later in the Committee' recommendations, it is indicated that by reason of 3 Judge being assigned to a particular area permanently» practitioners, knowing the particular Judge's requii" 0 ' ments, can practice in a more efficient and economic 3 way. Th at statement is perfectly correct. It is ab° suggested that changing a Judge from one area t0 another, from time to time, would give practitioner' greater experience in appearing before different Judg e ' and might provide more uniformity. It is difficult t0 understand the nature of the uniformity which woul° result. Practitioners generally have the experience 0 appearing before many District Justices and Circuit Court Judges and few mature practitioners lack expc f1 ' ence in this respect. It can be assumed that a particul 3 ' Judge will not change his outlook or attitude general 1 ) by reason of a change to a new area and it is not undei/ stood how any such change would result in uniformity in the application of the law. The important aspect 0 a Judge being assigned to a specific area is that there 15 continuity and an efficient dispatch of business, b) reason of the fact that far more often than appears t0 have been appreciated by the Committee it is necessaf) to adjourn cases from a Court to the following Couy» or from one venue to another venue. These are usual') cases which are part heard, cases in which some out- standing proof or some further evidence is required 111 100