U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Theorem on Judicial Administration (From Expeditious Justice, P 97-106, 1979 - See NCJ-86298)

NCJ Number
86300
Author(s)
J W Z Estey
Date Published
1979
Length
10 pages
Annotation
Litigation in Canada has increased dramatically in recent years, and the courts can handle it properly only through improved court machinery, new courts, improved legal education, pretrial techniques, improved court financing procedures, and countering specific detriments to court efficiency.
Abstract
Litigation has increased in Canada for a number of reasons, including the universal right of appeal, a growing number of lawyers, tax deductible business litigation, the profusion of legislation, and a profusion of agencies dedicated to more legislation. If the courts are to deal adequately with the growing volume of litigation, court staff job descriptions must be tailored to the demands placed on the courts rather than continuing to operate under staff assignments that have been used for decades. Further, provision should be made for the filing of documents by mail and the use of electronics in the transcription of evidence, such as the use of video recording for the presentation of expert witnesses. Further, a national judicial center should be established for the coordination and development of court staff, training procedures for new staff, standardized courtroom facilities, and the recording of Canadian cases in computers on a comprehensive basis. Little has been done to channel particular types of cases into alternative forums such as administrative hearings and neighborhood justice centers. An obvious way to increase the efficiency of the court system is to encourage lawyers practicing in the courts to receive specialized training in litigation. Pretrial procedures should seek agreement on the issues of appropriate charge and appropriate punishment if the defendant is convicted.