England and Wales: Outgoing judge Sir James Munby describes as ‘woefully indaequate’ help for litigants in person

On his final day in office last week, Sir James said: “Anybody who thinks that we currently have a network of courts which enables proper access to justice is deluding themselves.”

In one case, the judge noted, a litigant had to travel 24 miles on foot to court. He said people in rural areas and those without access to private transport were hardest hit.

“That is the reality of our present justice system,” he said.

“We don’t have – and haven’t for some time – the kind of system which serves people dependent on public transport.”

He added that courts must provide help to people who cannot afford lawyers and that they should be asked whether they would prefer to appear via service such as Skype.

“I don’t know what the answer is but we haven’t actually gone out and asked litigants what they actually prefer. I don’t know.”

He added: “I wouldn’t be surprised if a significant number of people would be saying actually … I’d rather do it by Skype.”

He also suggested that judges could travel to see litigants rather than vice versa.

He said: “Why shouldn’t the judge go and see the litigants? I was sitting in Norwich because Norwich was more convenient for the litigants than coming to London.”

He added: “I’ve said this before and people think I’m bonkers. When I was young one was familiar with huge vans going round the countryside. One was the mobile library, the other was a mobile X-ray unit when TB was a big problem in the country. Why don’t we use that kind of technology as a mobile court?”

Criticising the current arrangement, he commented: “The consequence is very large numbers of people come to court without representation. Our present court processes, our rules, our forms, our guidance, is woefully inadequate to enable litigants in person – even educated, highly articulate intelligent litigants in person – to understand the system.

“That’s a shocking reproach to us. That’s a current reality.”