Among the civil justice system's many drawbacks are:

• Costs are often disproportionately high relative to the claim and beyond the resources of potential litigants.
• Cases take too long to conclude.
• The rules impose procedural obligations that are often disproportionate to the needs of the case.
• The courts are too susceptible to manipulation of the rules, enabling obstructionist parties to delay proceedings.
• The running of cases is often left in the hands of the parties involved and their legal advisers rather than the courts, with the rules often ignored and unenforced.
• The system is inaccessible to many people, with inadequate efforts made to facilitate its use by litigants.
• The system promotes inequality between rich and poor litigants.

These failings drive people to seek alternative ways of settling and/or enforcing their civil rights, and can deprive them of justice. However, they can also be a catalyst for reform and are a reminder that the system cannot remain stagnant.

At the end of 2001, the working party released its Interim Report and Consultative Paper, which identified the issues that should be addressed to relieve pressure on the system and put forward as many as 80 proposals intended to simplify rules and procedures.

Most of the report's findings are not new; the criticisms and proposals for reform have been identified and implemented in other jurisdictions, such as the UK and Australia, making it very likely that Hong Kong will follow suit.

One of the ways that other jurisdictions have sought to enhance efficiency and accessibility is by incorporating modern technology, such as the Internet, into their legal systems.

For example, the Australian government invested more than AUD110 million in modernising its court system. There, law firms can now file documents electronically via the Internet and "if a document (other than an affidavit) is required ¡K to be signed, that requirement is satisfied if a facsimile of the signature is affixed on the document by electronic means, by, or at the direction of, the signatory."

These initiatives undoubtedly save time and reduce the cost of litigation. Lawyers do not need to attend meetings solely to ask a client to sign a document; telephone or fax instructions are adequate. In addition, using electronic lodgment allows lawyers total control over when a document is filed in court, saving traveling time to and from the court for mere filing purposes.

Furthermore, certain interim matters and hearings can be dealt with over the Internet, requiring the parties only to send an e-mail to the court requesting the same things that they would request in a hearing. Once the e-mail request has been posted, it is automatically sent to other registered parties in the case. These parties and the court then either approve or reject the request.

An added benefit is the greater administrative and case management control afforded the law firm and the solicitor in charge of the case. Furthermore, because cases are not left unattended when solicitors are out of the office, openness and accountability in court proceedings is facilitated, and solicitors do not need to waste time waiting in court for their cases to be heard.

Although these new measures have made court processes much more convenient, there is a security risk associated with the system. Because, currently, only a registered login name and password is required by the law society, it is possible that unethical members of the profession or unauthorised personnel could access the court database and commence court proceedings, or alter documents that have already been filed. To minimise such risks, we would strongly recommend that the login process requires a solicitor to use an electronic certificate.

In Hong Kong, the system is only in the initial stages of reform and it may be a few years before the sophisticated technologies currently implemented elsewhere are adopted here. And it is important to note that the success of such technologies in a court system is linked to the acceptability and uniformity of the technologies used within the legal profession. If the legal profession is already using these technologies, the chances of their being fully and successfully adopted in the court system are very high as few changes are needed. Therefore, an attempt should be made to introduce a paperless office in Hong Kong, modernising the legal profession's age-old traditions and making the transition to an "electronic" court that much easier.