Reforming civil justice systems: trends in industrial countries

Courts are the backbone of the rule of law, underpinning the institutional arrangements essential for a well-ordered and thriving society. But around the world, resolving disputes over contracts, property, family relations, and other noncriminal matters remains excessively expensive or inordinately protracted—putting courts beyond the reach of most citizens and undermining public confidence in the civil justice system. A recent survey examined problems with and reforms of civil justice in 3 common law nations—Australia, England, and the United States—and 10 civil law countries—Brazil, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, and Switzerland (Zuckerman 1999). All reported a continuing search for ways to improve the delivery of justice, but in most the history of reform has been disappointing. Problems have proven hard to solve despite repeated attempts over long periods. One constant that emerges from the survey is that the economic interests of the legal profession explain many of the costs and delays in litigation and that overcoming these interests is difficult. A second is that both civil and common law countries are resorting to greater judicial control of the litigation process to control lawyers and their clients. A third is the appearance of a new theory of civil procedure: one that stresses that the resources devoted to resolving a dispute should be proportionate to the interests involved and that systemwide resources should be allocated fairly across all disputes.