College of Social Sciences

This project, commissioned by Scottish Government’s Justice Analytical Service and the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service, will evaluate the changes made to civil justice processes and procedures as a result of the pandemic. The project seeks to improve and expand the evidence base so that any decision on whether specific pandemic measures such as online hearings are continued, amended further or discarded is informed by relevant and current research. 

From March 2020 Scotland’s courts and tribunals made a number of significant and swift changes to processes and procedures to comply with public health measures. These changes included a move towards remote hearings with civil business being conducted via video conferencing, greater use of tele conferencing, more widespread use of electronic documents and the removal of requirements for paper notices as opposed to electronic notifications and, in some cases, a move towards judicial decisions being taken on papers alone without the requirement for hearings.

This research, which will inform the future vision for the civil courts, tribunals and civil justice more broadly, is being conducted through a partnership between Ipsos and a team of researchers from the School of Law who will utilise a mixed methodology incorporating both quantitative and qualitative data collection and analysis. Data collection will focus on a specific group of court and tribunals and case types, namely the Mental Health Tribunal Scotland, the Health and Education Chamber of the Second Tier Tribunal and family cases and commercial actions heard by the Sheriff Courts and the Court of Session. The findings will be used to determine whether the experience of remote hearings and associated measures introduced during the pandemic are experienced differently by different groups of users, including parties, court and tribunal staff and the judiciary. The final report, due at the end of 2022, will make recommendations for a future model aimed at ensuring an improved service, equal treatment, and access to justice for all users of Scotland’s civil justice system.

Why Justice, Insecurity and Fair Decision Making?

In recent years interest has grown around notions of ‘digital justice’ which can be seen both as a levelling tool, capable of enabling greater access to justice, as well as a mean of restricting public access to the courts and threatening the principle of open justice. The emergency measures introduced in the wake of Covid necessitated a swift move to online hearings but, as we move out of the pandemic, it is important that we take stock of what worked, what didn’t and the future of civil justice in Scotland. This project thus has direct relevant to issues of justice, insecurity and fair decision-making.  

---

Researchers on this project are part of the Scottish Civil Justice Hub

First published: 22 June 2022