31/03/2023
Cachella Smith
A Ministry of Justice report into the impact of remote hearings on duration and outcomes has found little meaningful differences either in efficiency or effectiveness compared with in-person hearings.
Remote hearings have little impact on either the efficiency or the effectiveness of sittings, a new evaluation by the Ministry of Justice has found.
Remote participation in court hearings has been an option for years – however, out of necessity, it was during the pandemic that courts saw a rapid increase in the number of hearings held remotely.
A new study has considered the impact of remote hearings by analysing data from January 2020 to March 2022 and comparing it with similar in-person hearings or cases.
Small reductions in hearing durations were found with remote hearings – on average six minutes shorter than similar in-person hearings (two minutes shorter for Plea and Trial Preparation Hearings).
When totalled up from the whole remote hearing group – it was the equivalent of 1,076 hours (over 200 court sitting days).
While defined as statistically significant – holding the plea hearing remotely was not found to have an impact on the total case duration or the number of hearings required in a case.
Moreover, the majority of Listing Officers reported that in-person and remote hearings are listed for the same amount of time, while a third said that remote hearings were listed for a longer time than in-person.
The evaluation concludes: “This indicates that the listing practices do not currently take advantage of the potential benefits of shorter duration of remote hearings, but as courts gain more experience of remote hearings this listing approach may change.”
Technical issues in a minority of cases had led to adjournments – and such issues may lead to remote hearings requiring more time allocated overall the report said.
Courts were “unevenly impacted” by such difficulties – 66% reported no adjournments for this reason.
Meanwhile, looking at trial case outcomes – there was no impact on either guilty or not guilty pleas entered at or before the PTPH.
While remote plea hearings were associated with slightly more guilty pleas entered after a plea hearing (as well as fewer dropped cases and no pleas entered) – the differences were small enough to not be considered meaningful.
Remote plea hearings had no impact on convictions, acquittals or not guilty verdicts.
In July to September 2022 the Crown Court had 62,766 open cases.
“This analysis as a whole suggests there are little meaningful differences found in efficiency or effectiveness when remote hearings are used,” the report concludes.
“While small reductions in hearing durations were found with remote hearings, this analysis cannot fully answer whether individual remote hearings are more efficient than comparable in-person hearings.
“Firstly, holding the plea hearing remotely was found to have no impact on the total hearing duration of a trial case or the number of hearings required in a case. Secondly, individual hearing duration is only a part of influencing courts on an everyday basis. Additional time may be required for setting up remote hearings, or to deal with technical difficulties, limiting any efficiency benefits.
“Furthermore, it may be difficult to utilise any small reductions in individual hearing durations in real-world court setting, where both remote and in-person hearings take place.”