Skip to main content
Log in

Equal access to justice

  • Published:
Liverpool Law Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Conclusion

My concerns are unlikely to strike a note amongst those senior judges delivering “big justice” who will operate in the multi-track. They seldom encounter disabled people in their courts and when they do access, communication and representation problems are likely to have been sorted out at an earlier stage. But for those of us who have to deal with those earlier stages or are to (and already do) deliver “bulk justice” in the fast track and small claims courts, coping with disabled litigants is already a problem. Hitherto we have responded with insufficient care to their needs, but is it too late to hope that we may be encouraged (or better still constrained) to take into account their disclosed needs when managing cases so that civil proceedings may be conducted in a manner that is fair to all. If we do not face up to this now we could find ourselves and our courts in breach of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 which is intended to impose the new culture on society (including our courts). The message from society is clear: a change in the culture of civil justice is required but we must not overlook the “disability factor”.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Mental Incapacity, Report of the Law Commission, No. 231, London, H.M.S.O., February 1995.

  2. Assessment of Mental Incapacity, Guidance for Doctors and Lawyers. A Report of the British Medical Association and the Law Society, London, B.M.A., December 1995.

Download references

Authors

Additional information

A District Judge at Preston on the Northern Circuit.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ashton, G. Equal access to justice. Liverpool Law Rev 19, 29–36 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02810629

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02810629

Keywords

Navigation