|
| The research examined the implementation, operation and impact of a pilot court-based advice service which was introduced into Edinburgh Sheriff Court in April 1997 and funded, initially for one year, by the European Commission. The Edinburgh Sheriff Court In-court Advice Project is the first service providing legal and other advice to court users to be established in a Scottish court. The research monitored the In-court Advice Project over the first nine months of its operation by documenting the services which it provided and examining its impact on court users, the sheriff court and the civil justice system. The records of 893 consultations were examined, a client survey and 47 interviews were conducted, and 20 different court sittings were observed. The main report which is summarised here documents the research, its findings and their policy implications. The research was commissioned by the Legal Studies Research Branch of the Scottish Office on behalf of Scottish Courts Administration and conducted by Elaine Samuel at the Department of Social Policy, University of Edinburgh. |
|
| Main Findings |
|
- There was a large demand for the services of the In-court Advice Project. The Project was successful in providing services to a large number of court users.
- The number of clients consulting with the In-court Adviser increased dramatically over the first nine months.
- As the Project became established, more clients sought advice and support prior to their case calling in court and outwith court time. This permitted efficient use of Project resources and allowed it to meet the increasing demand for its services.
- Clients were provided with legal and procedural information and advice. Many were also referred on to other agencies, some for further advice and others to resolve their dispute.
- The Project was responsible for promoting a level playing field in the court room.
- Clients gave a powerful endorsement to the services provided by the Project, particularly for the court related support and assistance they had received.
- The Project helped to optimise the use of court resources and court time.
- Sheriffs welcomed the Project for facilitating efficiency and justice in the court room.
- The close working relationship which developed between sheriff clerks and the In-court Adviser was critical for the success of the Project.
- The Project filled a gap in the civil justice system by offering services which few other agencies in the system were providing.
- The Project contributed to the civil justice system by forging links between agencies and by promoting a sense of justice and inclusion in society through its support of court users.
|
|
| Background |
|
| A pilot in-court advice service located in Edinburgh Sheriff Court came into operation in April 1997 and is the first such service to be established in a Scottish court. The main aim of the pilot Project is to provide advice and information to those raising or defending small claims and summary cause (including housing) actions in the sheriff court. |
|
| The need for a court based advice service was first identified when small claims procedure was introduced into the Scottish civil justice system in 1988 and may have increased in the intervening years. Official statistics suggest that access to litigation has become increasingly difficult in the 1990s, unassisted litigants are appearing in summary and ordinary cause cases with increasing frequency, and this has implications for efficiency in the sheriff court as well as access to justice. Explanations for these trends have been located in the rising cost of legal advice and representation, sheriff court dues, and in changes to the financial eligibility criteria for civil legal aid which were introduced in 1993. Socio-legal research suggests that unassisted litigants are disadvantaged both in housing repossession, as well as in small claims, actions. |
|
| The proposal for a court based advice service was initiated by the Scottish Consumer Council and Citizens Advice Scotland. The establishment of a pilot project in Edinburgh Sheriff Court was triggered by the Sheriff Principal's intimation of his willingness for a court-based advice service to be introduced there. Support was confirmed by the Scottish Office and Scottish Courts Administration, and Citizens Advice Scotland and the Scottish Consumer Council were successful in securing funding from the Directorate-General XXIV of the European Commission for a pilot project which, initially, was to run for one year. |
|
| Responsibility for the performance of the In-court Advice Project was shared by Susan McPhee and Lynne MacMillan (on behalf of Citizens Advice Scotland and the Scottish Consumer Council respectively), and was staffed by one full time In-court Adviser working from an office in Edinburgh Sheriff Court. The day to day management of the Project worker was sub-contracted to Edinburgh Central Citizens Advice Bureau. |
|
| The aim of the In-court Advice Project was to provide court users with the necessary tools to pursue or defend a claim, and to assist them in preparing for a court appearance. An equally important aim of this pilot project was to test the need for the services it provided as well as its capacity to meet the demand it may encounter. The main task of the In-court Adviser was to offer advice to unassisted litigants in small claims, summary cause (including housing) actions, as well as in ordinary cause actions where The Debtors (Scotland) Act 1987 applied, and to refer them on to appropriate agencies when this was necessary. Liaison with the Sheriff Clerk's Office and agencies, such as local authority housing departments and other advice agencies was also within the Project's remit. Court representation was only to be offered in emergencies. Expertise in court related matters, though not professional legal qualifications, was required of the successful applicant to the post. With this remit, the Project first opened its door to clients on April 7, 1997. |
|
Research ran concurrently with the In-court Advice Project, and was designed with the following aims: - to monitor the operation of the Project over its first nine months;
- to assess the demand and need for services provided by the Project during this period;
- to evaluate the Project for its capacity to deliver advice and support to unassisted litigants in the sheriff court.
|
|
| The research was also designed to assess the impact of the Project on: its clients; the network of court practitioners and advice agencies using Edinburgh Sheriff Court; the sheriff court and court personnel. |
|
| Research Findings |
|
| Project Business |
|
| Over the first nine months of the In-court Advice Project, the In-court Adviser conducted 893 consultations with 674 clients. Services were spread over a large client base and appeared not to encourage vexatious litigation. Clients were mostly defenders (77%) and the majority (56%) were seeking advice on cases arising from rental arrears. Opportunities for referral to the Project were largely structured by procedural remit, status and type of claim. While pursuers were mainly referred by sheriff clerks, defenders in housing cases were mainly informed about the Project by inserts which the City of Edinburgh Housing Department had agreed to issue with summonses. Defenders in small claims and non-housing summary cause cases had fewer opportunities for referral to the Project. Almost half of all consultations were conducted prior to cases calling in court, and these consultations outwith court time increased dramatically over the first nine months of the Project. Inserts in summonses were responsible for significant increases in the volume of business dealt with by the Project over this period, for the rising number of consultations conducted before cases called in court and outwith court time, and for the ability of the Project to meet the rising demand for its services. |
|
| Project Services |
|
| The Adviser promoted the Project amongst other agencies and developed informational services to court users. Almost all clients were given information and advice on procedure and court routine, including when to attend court, how best to present their case to the court, what to request from the court and what offer to make to the court. Legal advice was provided to over one third of all clients. In small claims and summary cause cases, this was often advice as to jurisdiction, the merits of the case or the formulation of a defence. In housing cases, it was usually advice as to the reasonableness of eviction under The Housing(Scotland) Act 1987. Advice on welfare benefits was provided to 13% of clients while another 20% (usually clients involved in housing cases) were referred to other advice agencies. One third of all housing clients were subsequently referred to local authority housing departments for resolution of the matter. |
|
| Court Users and Project Clients |
|
| The Project reached mainly defenders (77%), individuals (95%) and males (56%) except in rent arrears cases where there were as many female as male clients. Over half of all clients were involved in cases against local authorities and a further quarter faced corporate litigants. Most clients faced legally represented parties (78% of all clients and 93% of defenders) and had themselves received no advice prior to consulting the In-court Adviser. More than half of all respondents to the client survey believed the Adviser was responsible for making a decisive impact on their case. Particular mention was made of the help given when they appeared in court. Services provided by the Project were reported to be useful, user friendly, supportive and accessible. |
|
| The Sheriff Court |
|
| The Project helped to optimise court resources by smoothing the passage of unassisted litigants through the sheriff court and diverting cases from court, especially at later procedural stages, when a full hearing or proof might otherwise have been held. The opportunity for sheriff clerks to refer clients to the In-court Adviser reduced the pressures associated with their role. They were quick to develop a co-operative working relationship with the In-court Adviser. Sheriffs were aware of the problems which unassisted litigants faced in court and of the difficulties which they often presented for the court. They welcomed the work of the In-court Adviser for its contribution to the performance of their judicial duties, for example, by helping them get quickly and accurately to disputed issues or to the reasonableness of a decree for eviction. |
|
| The Wider Context |
|
| The Project made a number of referrals to mediation by recruiting appropriate candidates. Advice agencies reported no adverse impact on them and while referrals to some agencies were more likely to be taken up than others, referrals from the Project were commended for their appropriateness. Advantages of the Project were recognised by some solicitors, though occasionally obscured by its potential for making them stay longer in court than otherwise expected. The Project filled a gap in the provision of specialist services needed not only by court users but by other advice agencies. It also contributed to the civil justice system by forging links between loosely connected agencies, and by promoting a sense of justice and inclusion in civil society through its attempt to help court users achieve higher levels of participation, control and understanding of court procedure. |
|
| Discussion |
|
| Demand for the service was subject to variations in local authority housing policy and greater need for the service appeared to emanate from certain geographical areas of the city. This only explained periods of extremely high demand, however, since demand from elsewhere and at other times never fell below a certain level. Indeed, as the Project established itself over the first year and subsequently, demand has increased very significantly. It is likely that amongst many defenders in non-housing cases, the services of the Project offers have yet to be translated into demand. To do so may require the co-operation of pursuers and their agents, just as it has in housing cases. Because demand for the In-court Adviser peaked during court time, clients were often referred to other advice agencies after being provided with initial procedural advice. Some difficulties arose in the rate of take-up of these referrals. Attempts were made to address this issue after the research period. |
|
| Many of the research findings reported here are of relevance to the issues identified in the Scottish Office consultation paper Access to Justice: Beyond the Year 2000. 1 In particular, the research provides a basis for discussion about the provision of community legal services in Scotland and the arrangements which may be made for improving and strengthening the provision of accessible advice and assistance on legal problems within communities. The In-court Advice Project in Edinburgh Sheriff Court piloted new arrangements for delivering legal services and targeting unmet need in Scotland. Though all related to the court and court procedures, the needs for advice and assistance which the Project met were broad in scope and were not readily accessible elsewhere. |
|
| About the study |
|
| The research was conducted between April 1997 and September 1998 by Elaine Samuel at the Department of Social Policy, University of Edinburgh, and was commissioned by the Legal Studies Research Branch of The Scottish Office on behalf of Scottish Courts Administration. In all, 47 interviews were conducted with key players in the In-court Advice Project, sheriffs, sheriff court employees and practitioners, representatives of advice agencies, and clients. A client survey was also conducted by dispatching questionnaires to 481 clients consulting with the In-court Adviser between April and October 1997. All consultations conducted between April and December 1997 were monitored and information was collected from the records of 893 consultations relating to 683 cases and 674 clients. In addition, more than 20 different sittings of the small claims/ summary cause and the summary cause (heritage) court in Edinburgh Sheriff Court were observed. |
|
| 1. Scottish Office Home Department (1998) Access to Justice-Beyond the Year 2000: A Consultations Paper on Civil Legal Aid, Edinburgh |
|
Supporting Court Users: The In-court Advice Project in Edinburgh Sheriff Court (1999), the research report summarised in this Research Findings, is available priced £5. Cheques should be made payable to the Stationery Office and addressed to:
The Stationery Office Bookshop,
71 Lothian Road,
Edinburgh,
EH3 9AZ. |
| Telephone: 0131-228 4181, or Fax: 0131-622 7017 |
|
| The report can also be ordered from:www.thestationeryoffice.co.uk |
|
Further copies of this Research Findings may be obtained from:
The Scottish Office Central Research Unit,
Room J1-0,
Saughton House,
Broomhouse Drive,
Edinburgh EH11 3XA |
|
| This document and other Research Findings and reports may be viewed on the Internet at: http: //www.scotland.gov.uk/cru/ |