Even Winners Think Courts Are Biased In Personal Injury Cases
Sydney Morning Herald
Monday April 14, 1997
The first detailed study of how people experienced the NSW justice system has revealed that 44 per cent said they could not completely trust their lawyers and 40 per cent said their lawyers did not give good value for money. The three-year study, believed the most comprehensive of its type in Australia, questioned 255 people whose personal injury cases went through the NSW justice system - in the courts, arbitration or alternatives such as mediation.
The study was conducted by the NSW Justice Research Centre, funded by the legal profession and government grants. It concluded that its findings "ought to create a sense of discomfort in the profession".
The centre's director, Professor Ted Wright, told the Herald the findings reflected only "perceptions" about lawyers, so it was possible lawyers were bad communicators rather than poor providers of value for money.
Of the 255 people surveyed, about 60 per cent went through a full court hearing to pursue their claim in front of a judge or had an arbitrator decide. The study compared how these people fared and felt about the system with those who went through alternatives to formal hearings and used a pre-trial conference - a meeting at court before the trial - or mediation.
The study's results surprised the researchers. Nearly a quarter of people surveyed said the justice system was biased. A third of people who won the settlements or awards they expected, or did better, still thought the system biased.
Overall, 25 per cent of the people surveyed thought the system unfair - regardless of the procedure used to resolve their claim. The feeling of having been treated unfairly was highest among the 82 people who went to court (only 62 per cent of them felt fairly treated).
About 40 per cent of all those surveyed were unhappy with the outcome of their claims. Again, dissatisfaction was highest (50 per cent) among those who went to trial. Yet 85 per cent of those who had their claims resolved at pre-trial conferences were happy with the results.
The researchers said their results clearly showed that people's perception of justice in NSW was closely linked to how they pursued their claims. Those who used pre-trial conferences were the most satisfied with the outcome and the legal system. They were closely followed by those who went to mediation.
People who went to court or used arbitration emerged the least happy with the process.
The study found deep dissatisfaction with the time taken in NSW to resolve personal injury claims. Those surveyed had taken from one to 16 years to resolve their claims and the median time to resolve cases that went to court was seven years.
Of people who went to court, 76 per cent were dissatisfied with the time it took to resolve their claims, compared with 20 per cent who were successful at a pre-trial conference.
Surprisingly, the study found that veterans of the personal injury claims system - who had pursued litigation previously - were no more likely to see the system as fairer than those claiming for the first time.
© 1997 Sydney Morning Herald