Instant justice

Lately, I was fortunate to meet Mr Justice William Rose, a United Kingdom circuit judge, at a reception held in his honour by the British High Commissioner. The said judge's visit was sponsored by the said British High Commissioner in liaison with the Judicial Studies Committee, spearheaded by Maltese senior judge Mr Justice J. D. Camilleri. The scope of the visit was to discuss with members of our local judiciary and representatives of the government, the possibility of introducing a system whereby judgements are delivered there and then by the court, that is, ex tempore.

In the case of the civil courts in Malta such a practice is totally alien as is the case before the inferior courts or the small claims tribunals. Even before such courts, the rule is that cases are put off for judgement and the court will go into lengthy arguments in its written judgement. Obviously such a practice, though it enhances our jurisprudence, signifies delays.

In conversation with the said British judge, it was pointed out to me that ex tempore judgements are the rule and not the exception in his country. It is only in exceptional cases that the court will reserve judgement and this usually in sensitive and important issues which would merit a more elaborate ruling.

I also learnt that normally, on average, a particular judge will deliver about 200 decisions a year, which is in fact lower than the Maltese average and this notwithstanding the extra amount of research and work our judges must face in delivering lengthy judgements.

For some time now, I myself, together with others, have made similar suggestions in Parliament. Our Code of Organisation and Civil Procedure clearly distinguishes between solemn and summary proceedings.

The proceedings before the superior courts, that is those presided over by judges, are always solemn and formal while those conducted before the inferior courts presided over by magistrates are not. It has therefore been suggested that as a start and on an experimental basis it could be opportune to formalise the law encouraging decisions before the inferior courts to be made on the spot after the submissions by the litigating parties would have been made. This will undoubtedly facilitate the work of our magistrates and adjudicators a great deal and should result in more judgements being given to the benefit of one and all.

The idea of introducing such a system exclusively in the case of the inferior courts for the time being makes sense. The reason is that the civil cases before such courts are, as a rule, of less importance than those before the superior courts and therefore surely deserve to be treated less formally.

It must be pointed out that though, as stated earlier, our law implies a distinction between solemn and summary proceedings as a rule and in practice, no distinction is apparent in the way court cases are conducted. Encouraging magistrates to give ex tempore judgements will undoubtedly spell the difference intended all along. Undoubtedly, however, once a party gives notice of appeal then it would be necessary for the court to deliver a more detailed judgement explaining in depth the reasons behind its conclusions.

It is interesting to note that in fact a system of ex tempore judgements already exists before the Magistrates' Court in its criminal jurisdiction. When magistrates try minor criminal offences they deliver judgement there and then in one sitting after hearing the evidence and submissions. To facilitate matters here the depositions given are never transcribed.

In this fashion the Magistrates' Court is able to deliver thousands of judgements a year and had the judicial procedure been different this would hardly be possible. It must be pointed out that even here certain judgements do carry certain importance and can include hefty fines and even prison sentences. Here too once a defendant gives notice of appeal the presiding magistrate will then proceed to give a more detailed judgement. The evidence will then necessarily have to be heard in appeal. This notwithstanding, experience has shown that only a fraction of judgements are ever appealed of and there is no reason to doubt that the same trend would be followed before the civil courts.

The government has declared its intention of introducing further reforms to expedite judicial proceedings. It would be wise for the minister to consider also the possibility of introducing reforms such as the ones mentioned.

Dr Herrera is a Labour member of Parliament.