The Digital Divide in UK Courts: Navigating System Access as a Litigant in Person (LiP)

Following on from our article on the digital divide in UK courts, we’re diving deeper into the specific systems that create disparities between legal professionals and Litigants in Person (LiPs). This detailed examination reveals how limited access to digital tools can significantly disadvantage those navigating the legal system without representation.

According to the Family Court Statistics Quarterly: April to June 2023, litigants in person (LiPs) represented 40% of all parties in private family law cases during this period, highlighting the scale of this issue in UK courts (Family Court Statistics Quarterly: April to June 2023)

Digital Systems Available to Legal Professionals

1. CE-File System

The CE-File system, used in the Business and Property Courts, offers key functionalities such as:

Electronic document filing 24/7
Online payment of court fees
Instant access to case documents
Automatic notifications for case updates

These features streamline the filing and case management processes, improving efficiency and accessibility for legal professionals (Judiciary UK).

Litigants in person (LiPs) can use a limited version of the CE-File system. However, they often face challenges due to its complexity, which can result in missing out on instant notifications and easy document access that are more readily available to legal professionals (Judiciary UK).

2. Digital Case System (DCS)

The Digital Case System (DCS) in Crown Courts provides several functionalities for barristers and solicitors, including:

Digital access to all case materials
Ability to make notes and highlight documents
Sharing annotations with colleagues
Real-time updates on case progression

LiPs typically do not have access to the DCS, relying instead on physical documents, which can be less efficient and more cumbersome (UKAuthority) (GovNet Events).

3. Cloud Video Platform (CVP)

The Cloud Video Platform (CVP) is accessible to both lawyers and LiPs for remote hearings. However, legal professionals generally have:

Better technical support from their firms
More experience with the platform
Access to practice sessions and training

Conversely, LiPs may struggle with technical issues and lack familiarity with virtual court etiquette (GOV.UK) (GOV.UK) (Family Law).

4. e-Bundling Software

Legal firms often use specialised e-bundling software to enhance document management efficiency. This software allows them to:

Compile and organise case documents efficiently
Create hyperlinked indexes for easy navigation
Collaborate on bundle preparation

In contrast, LiPs usually prepare physical bundles or use basic PDF tools, which can be time-consuming and prone to errors.

Recommendation for LiPs: Zylpha Document Bundling Software

Zylpha Ltd’s document bundling software can be an excellent tool for LiPs. It offers:

A user-friendly interface for quick and easy bundle creation
Automation of tasks like numbering, indexing, and organising files
Features for document manipulation, redaction, and annotation
Security and compliance with court standards
Comprehensive support and resources to help users navigate the software (Document Bundling Software – Zylpha Ltd).

In summary, Zylpha provides a comprehensive and user-friendly solution for LiPs to prepare court bundles efficiently and accurately.

Practical Implications for LiPs

The limited access to these digital tools creates several disadvantages for LiPs:

Time Disadvantage: LiPs often spend more time on administrative tasks that lawyers can complete quickly using specialised software.
Information Asymmetry: Without access to systems like DCS, LiPs may receive case updates later than the opposing legal team.
Document Management Challenges: Lack of access to e-bundling tools can lead to disorganised or incomplete case files.
Communication Barriers: LiPs may miss important notifications or struggle to file documents on time without 24/7 electronic filing systems.
Technological Learning Curve: LiPs must navigate unfamiliar systems with limited support, adding stress to an already challenging process (Commons Library) (ACSO) (Judiciary UK).

Case Study: Sarah’s Experience as a LiP

Sarah, a single mother from Manchester, found herself navigating the family court system as a LiP in a child arrangements case. Despite being comfortable with technology in her daily life, she struggled with the court’s digital systems.

“I spent hours trying to figure out how to file my documents electronically,” Sarah recounts. “When I finally managed to upload them, I realised I had missed a crucial notification about a deadline change. It felt like I was always one step behind, while my ex-partner’s solicitor seemed to breeze through the process.”

Sarah’s experience highlights the real-world impact of the digital divide on LiPs in UK courts (Judiciary UK).

Recent Developments and Pilot Programmes

Some courts are recognising the challenges faced by Litigants in Person (LiPs) and are implementing solutions to improve their access to digital services:

MyHMCTS: This service is being piloted to provide LiPs with similar online capabilities to those available to legal professionals for certain case types. MyHMCTS allows for online submission and management of various applications, such as civil claims, divorce, employment tribunals, and more. The platform aims to streamline the process for users by providing digital tools for case management (GOV.UK) (Inside HMCTS).
LiP Document Upload Pilot: Selected courts are testing systems that allow LiPs to upload documents electronically, mirroring the capabilities of the CE-File system used by legal professionals. This initiative aims to reduce the dependency on physical document submissions, making the process more efficient for LiPs (GOV.UK).
Enhanced Digital Support: Some courts are now offering in-person digital support services to help LiPs navigate online systems. These support services include assistance with using digital tools and understanding the procedural aspects of their cases, thereby reducing the barriers faced by LiPs in accessing digital court services (ELA Web).

Additionally, the UK government’s 2021 report, “A Digital Justice System for All,” acknowledged the challenges faced by LiPs and outlined plans to improve digital access. However, the implementation of these plans has been slow, primarily due to budget constraints and other operational pressures (Inside HMCTS).

Overall, while these pilot programmes and support initiatives represent significant steps towards enhancing digital access for LiPs, there are still challenges to be addressed to ensure these solutions are fully effective and widely available.

The Online Civil Money Claims Service: A Step in the Right Direction

The Online Civil Money Claims (OCMC) service is indeed designed to be user-friendly for Litigants in Person (LiPs) and offers several features aimed at simplifying the claims process:

Simplified Claim Submission Process: The OCMC service provides a streamlined digital process for submitting claims, significantly reducing the complexity involved in traditional methods. Users can submit claims online up to £10,000 and manage the entire process digitally.
Clear Guidance at Each Step: The platform offers detailed guidance throughout the claim submission process, ensuring that users are well-informed at every stage. This helps LiPs understand the requirements and steps involved, making the system more accessible.
Automatic Calculations for Fees and Interest: The service includes automatic calculations for court fees and interest, reducing the chances of errors and ensuring that users can accurately determine the costs associated with their claims.

Since its launch in 2018, the OCMC service has processed over 472,000 claims. It has achieved high user satisfaction rates, with an average of 95% for claimants and 66% for defendants. This high satisfaction rate underscores the effectiveness of the system in making the claims process more accessible and user-friendly for non-professionals.

In summary, the OCMC service demonstrates that designing digital systems with LiPs in mind can significantly reduce the digital divide and improve access to justice. The service’s user-friendly interface, clear guidance, and efficient processing are key factors in its success and high user satisfaction.

The Way Forward

To address the digital divide, the UK justice system should consider:

Expanding LiP access to existing professional systems with appropriate safeguards and simplified interfaces.
Developing more LiP-focused systems like the Online Civil Money Claims service for various case types.
Providing comprehensive training and support for LiPs using digital court systems.
Ensuring judges are aware of the digital disparities and can make appropriate accommodations.
Maintaining non-digital alternatives to ensure access to justice for those unable to use online systems (Judiciary UK).

Conclusion

The detailed examination of digital court systems reveals a significant disparity in the tools available to legal professionals versus LiPs. While digitisation has the potential to improve access to justice, the current implementation often disadvantages those without legal representation.

As we continue to modernise our court systems, it is crucial to consider the needs of all court users, including LiPs. By addressing the digital divide, we can work towards a more equitable justice system that truly provides equal access for all.

Legal professionals have a responsibility to advocate for these changes. Whether through engaging with local bar associations, participating in court user groups, or supporting pro bono initiatives that help LiPs navigate digital systems, they can all play a part in bridging this divide and ensuring equal access to justice.

Let’s start a conversation: What experiences have you had with digital court systems? How do you think we can better support LiPs in navigating these tools? Share your thoughts in the comments below.

#UKLegalTech #AccessToJustice #DigitalDivide #LitigantsInPerson #LegalReform #DigitalCourts #ProBono #UKLaw #LegalProfession #EquitableJustice

References

HM Courts & Tribunals Service. (2024). “HMCTS E-Filing service for citizens and professionals”. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/ce-file-system-information-and-support-advice
Ministry of Justice. (2023). “Annual Report and Accounts 2022-23”. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6565e39962180b0012ce8302/_HC13__MOJ_Annual_Report_and_Accounts_2022-23.pdf
Courts and Tribunals Judiciary. (2024). “How to join Cloud Video Platform (CVP) for a video hearing”. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/how-to-join-a-cloud-video-platform-cvp-hearing/how-to-join-cloud-video-platform-cvp-for-a-video-hearing
Byrom, N. (2023). “Digital Justice: HMCTS Data Strategy and Delivering Access to Justice”. The Legal Education Foundation. https://research.thelegaleducationfoundation.org/research-learning/funded-research/digital-justice
Ministry of Justice. (2023). “Family Court Statistics Quarterly: January to March 2023”. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/family-court-statistics-quarterly-january-to-march-2023
Online Civil Money Claims Service. (2024). “Fact sheet: Online Civil Money Claims”. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/hmcts-reform-civil-fact-sheets/fact-sheet-online-civil-money-claims

Public Interest Disclosure Statement

This statement outlines the principles guiding disclosures made in my articles, which aim to serve the public interest by promoting transparency and accountability.

Guiding Principles

Public Interest: Disclosures are made to serve the public interest, inspired by the principles underlying the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998.
Ethical Reporting: I strive to adhere to ethical reporting practices to the best of my ability as a non-professional writer.
Factual Accuracy: All information disclosed is factual and evidence-based to the best of my knowledge.
Good Faith: Disclosures are made without malice and with a genuine belief in their truth and public importance.
Proportionality: The extent of disclosure is proportionate to the perceived wrongdoing or risk.
Confidentiality: Sources and sensitive information are protected where appropriate.

Legal Considerations

Disclosures are made with consideration of:

Data Protection Act 2018 and UK GDPR: Personal data is processed in compliance with data protection principles.
Defamation Act 2013:Truth: Factual statements are true to the best of my knowledge.Honest Opinion: Opinions are clearly identified and based on facts.Public Interest: Publication is believed to be in the public interest.
Human Rights Act 1998: Disclosures exercise the right to freedom of expression, balanced against other rights.

Ethical Standards

While not a professional journalist, I strive to maintain high ethical standards in my reporting, including:

Verifying information to the best of my ability.
Seeking comment from those involved where possible.
Being transparent about my methods and limitations.

Disclaimer

This statement does not claim legal protections specific to employee whistleblowers or professional journalists. While every effort is made to ensure accuracy and ethical compliance, this is not legal advice. I am not a legal professional or a qualified journalist. Legal and ethical advice will be sought in cases of uncertainty.

By adhering to these principles, I aim to make responsible disclosures that serve the public interest while respecting legal and ethical obligations.