Strasbourg, 20 June 2008
CEPEJ- SATURN(2008)2
EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR THE EFFICIENCY OF JUSTICE
(CEPEJ)
Groupe de Pilotage of the SATURN Centre for judicial time management
(CEPEJ-SATURN)
3rd meeting - Strasbourg, 15-16 May 2008 - Meeting report
Report prepared by the Secretariat
Directorate General of Human Rights and Legal Affairs
1. The Groupe de pilotage of the SATURN Centre for the study and analysis of judicial time management held its third meeting on 15 and 16 May 2008 in Strasbourg, with Mr Jacques BÜHLER (Switzerland) in the chair.
2. The agenda appears in Appendix I and the list of participants in Appendix II to this report.
1. Information from the Secretariat
3. The Group was informed of the advances in the process of evaluating European judicial systems, expected to result in discussion of the report by the plenary CEPEJ for adoption at its 11th plenary meeting (2-3 July 2008). The report could then be transmitted to the Committee of Ministers and made public at the beginning of October 2008.
2. Processing of the replies to the questionnaire on common case categories, judicial time-frames and delays
4. Marco FABRI, scientific expert (Italy) presented the synopsis of replies to the questionnaire drawn up by the Group CEPEJ-SATURN(2007)3 and sent to all pilot courts (these being invited to ensure circulation to other courts in their countries). The questionnaire was designed to collect the information needed for better knowledge of the categories of cases entertained in courts, the procedural time frames according to type of case, and the methods used to organise the management of time in courts. The replies should be processed so as to lay down guidelines for judicial time management.
5. The Group sincerely thanked Marco FABRI and Domenico PISCITELLI for their rapidly produced synopsis.
6. Marco Fabri spoke of difficulties encountered in preparing the study: certain questions had generated little information (particularly questions 3 and 7); the courts had not all interpreted the replies in the same terms or not followed the indications in the explanatory note. It was emphasised that non-replies also constituted an indication, to the effect that the requested information was not available at the court.
7. 55 courts of 23 member states had taken part in the study. The Group sincerely thanked the courts that had participated fully in the exercise, while regretting that half the member states were not represented. Marco Fabri noted geographical imbalances in the replies: the countries of Central and Eastern Europe were over-represented compared to those of Western Europe.
8. The Group nevertheless viewed the questionnaire and the available replies as forming a credible operative basis for continuation of the work:
§ It was agreed to recontact the pilot courts, urging those that had not done so to reply, and those so desiring to develop their replies, which should be effected by 15 July 2007. The courts would be informed that they could approach the questionnaire fairly flexibly by not answering each and every question. The optional nature of the replies to questions 3 and 7 and the practical cases would need to be emphasised in particular.
§ At a subsequent stage, the Ministries of Justice and the Judicial Service Commissions might also be consulted on the basis of the questionnaire.
§ The courts having given the fullest possible replies might be looked upon as privileged partners for further investigation of certain fields.
§ The status of work would need to be discussed with the pilot courts at their next plenary meeting on 24 October 2008 in Catania (Italy).
9. The Group proposed to take into account the conclusions drawn from processing the replies to this specific questionnaire on judicial time frames and delays in order to review, if appropriate, the questions asked as part of the CEPEJ’s Scheme for the evaluation of judicial systems.
10. The scientific expert was asked to continue his analytical work. His pilot report should be completed at the end of September 2008 for consideration at the next plenary meeting, stating the requisite scientific precautions and explanations for its comprehension and proper use. It would then be completed before the meeting of pilot courts on 24 October 2008.
3. Draft guidelines [green book] for judicial time management
11. Mr Alan UZELAC submitted a preliminary draft document containing guidelines for judicial time management.
12. Mr BÜHLER pointed out that the document should rely on other documents already produced by the CEPEJ, in particular the Framework Programme on timeframes, the Compendium of best practices and the Time management checklist. All due regard should be had to previous productions, without being afraid of repetitions.
13. Mr OBERTO suggested emphasising in the document the role of the government and the legislator in respect of good judicial time management, referring in particular to the existing Council of Europe standards concerning interventionism of judges and simplification of procedures. He thought that the following questions could be raised:
§ resources of courts,
§ limitation of appeals,
§ time limit for prosecution,
§ reasoning of decisions – not to be the cause of undue delays,
§ basis on which lawyers’ fees were calculated and which ought not to be determined by the number of documents lodged and the number of hearings, liable to be an incentive to prolong proceedings.
14. Mr JOHNSON proposed that the document comprise a part for practitioners of justice and a part for other legal professionals.
15. It was agreed that the document should contain:
§ uniform rules on collection of information and judicial time management,
§ rules on the conduct of court proceedings,
§ recommendations directed at the legislator,
§ recommendations for the judicial professions (ethical rules, etc.)
16. Additional comments from the members of the Group could be sent to Alan UZELAC, with copy to the Secretariat, so that Mr UZELAC might finalise his draft document by the end of July.
17. The document should have an appended statistical model for calculating timeframes, the draft of which Mr BÜHLER proposed to prepare by the end of July.
18. The revised document would be sent out to the members of the Group at the beginning of August. Comments should be forwarded to the Secretariat by mid-September 2008, so that a consolidated version could be discussed at the meeting on 9 and 10 October.
aNNExE I
AGENDA / ORDRE DU JOUR
1. Adoption of the agenda / Adoption de l’ordre du jour
2. Information by the President of the Group and the Secretariat /
Information du Président du Groupe et du Secrétariat
3. Exploitation of the answers to the questionnaire on common case categories, judicial timeframes and delays / Exploitation des réponses au questionnaire sur les typologies d'affaires, les délais judiciaires et les retards de procédure
- Exchange of views with Mr Marco FABRI, scientific expert /
Echange de vues avec M. Marco FABRI, expert-scientifique
4. Draft guidelines [Green book] for judicial time management /
Projet de lignes directrices [livre vert] pour la maîtrise du temps judiciaires
5. Follow up to the on-going work / Suivi des travaux
6. Other business / Questions diverses
ANNEXE II
List of participants / Liste des participants
Irakli ADEISHVILI, Chair of Civil Chamber of Tbilisi District Court, Tbilisi, Georgia
Jacques BÜHLER, Secrétaire Général suppléant, Tribunal fédéral suisse, LAUSANNE, SUISSE (Chair of the Group / Président du Groupe)
Gaby EMAN, Advisor, Directorate General for the Administration of Justice and Law Enforcement, Instruments Department, Ministry of Justice, THE HAGUEn, THE NETHERLANDS
Jon T. JOHNSEN, Professor in Law, Faculty of law, University of Oslo, NORWAY
Giacomo OBERTO, Magistrat, Tribunal de Grande Instance, TURIN, ITALIE
Alan UZELAC, Ph.D. Professor at the Faculty of Law, University of Zagreb, ZAGREB, CROATIA
Jana WURSTOVA, Lawyer, Adviser, Czech Bar Association, PRAGUE 1, Czech republic
***
John STACEY, Head of Civil and Family Procedures Branch, HM Court Service, Civil Law and Justice Division, LONDON, UNITED KINGDOM (Vice-Chair of the CEPEJ / Vice–Président de la CEPEJ)
***
Scientific Expert / Expert scientifique
Marco FABRI, Research Institute on Judicial Systems, National Research Council, BOLOGNA, ITALY
OBSERVERS / OBSERVATEURS
EUROPEAN UNION OF RECHTSPFLEGER AND COURT CLERKS/UNION EUROPEENNE DES GREFFIERS DE JUSTICE (EUR)
Michel CRAMET, Coordonnateur, Service aministratif régional de la Cour d’Appel de Lyon, LYON, FRANCE
EUROPEAN COMMISSION / COMMISSION EUROPEENNE : Apologised / Excusée
SECRETARIAT
Directorate Directorate General of Human Rights and Legal Affairs – Justice Division
Direction générale des droits de l’Homme et affaires juridiques (DG-HL) -
Division de la Justice
Fax: +33 3 88 41 37 43
E-mail: [email protected]
Stéphane LEYENBERGER, Secretary of the CEPEJ / Secrétaire de la CEPEJ, Tel : +33 3 88 41 34 12, e-mail: [email protected]
Pim ALBERS, Special Advisor to the Secretariat of the CEPEJ/ Conseiller spécial auprès du Secrétariat de la CEPEJ, Tel: +33 88 41 47 74, e-mail: [email protected]
Jean-Pierre GEILLER, Documentation, Tel : +33 3 88 41 22 27, e-mail : [email protected]
Sandrine MAROLLEAU, Communication, Tél: +33 3 90 21 52 08, e-mail: [email protected]
Elisabeth HEURTEBISE, Assistante, Tel : +33 3 88 41 35 54, Fax : +33 3 88 41 37 45, e-mail: [email protected]
Interpreters / Interprètes
Mme Chloé CHENETIER
Philippe QUAINE
M. Nicolas GUITTONNEAU